An acknowledging officer is legally bound not to execute false certificates of acknowledgment.  If an officer does execute a false certificate, an aggrieved person can bring an action against that officer.  For the purpose of statue of limitations, causes of action against an acknowledging officer for executing a false certificate of acknowledgment accrue on the date of making the certificate and not the time of discovery of its falsity.  Where the officer fraudulently conceals the making of the certificate, the cause of action arises when the person aggrieved discovers such fraud or is reasonably expected to have discovered the fraud.

In an action against an acknowledging officer for making a false or defective certificate, the initial burden is on the person aggrieved to establish a prima facie case showing that the person has suffered injury from false certificate.  This is because the acknowledging officer being a public officer, there is a presumption that s/he has fully performed the duty.  Once the person aggrieved discharges the initial burden, then the burden shifts to the officer who has to prove that proper degree of care was taken in executing the certificate.

While issuing a certificate of acknowledgement, an acknowledging officer certifies that the officer has personal knowledge about the identity of the person acknowledging.  Acknowledgment should not be on mere word of some individuals.  Further, the officer should be sure of the identity and should have reasonable grounds to base the recitals in the certificate as to the identity.

A mere self-introduction or an introduction by a third person is also not a sufficient evidence of identity.  In the absence of relevant statutory requirement, if the person introducing the party is known to the officer and is acquainted with the party, and there are no grounds to disbelieve the identity of the party, the officer can rely upon the introduction by a third person without further proof.  Whether the officer was justified in issuing a certificate upon a mere introduction by a third person is a question of fact.

If the officer has no personal knowledge of the party, the officer can demand formal proof of the party’s identity.  Relevant statute may require for evidence on oath or affirmation of one more credible witness.  Notary statute provides that where the officer has no personal knowledge about the identity of the party, the officer may obtain an oath or affirmation of a reliable witness as to the party’s identity.

In an action against an acknowledging officer for a false or defective certificate of acknowledgment, court awards damages for the injury suffered or loss sustained by the party due to the wrongful act of the officer.

If the wrongful act of the officer resulted in loss to the holder of a mortgage or some other security or interest, the damage will be the amount of value of the mortgage or other right that would have accrued upon the party if the instrument was valid.

In cases of acknowledging a wife’s signature which was forged by the husband, officer is made liable for emotional distress damage as well as economic damages for violation of statutory duties.

When the injury or loss is due to factors other than false or defective certificate, or when the party fails to prove the extent of loss or damage, the party can recover only the nominal damages.  Generally, an injured party can also recover attorney’s fees along with damages.