What does the phrase "and who did/did not take an oath" mean, and what do I do with it?

For only one year did the phrase "who did/did not take an oath" appear in Florida Statutes, and yet it became such a popular phrase that it is now standard on many pre-printed forms. It is important that you know how to deal with this wording in the appropriate manner to avoid contradicting yourself.

If the pre-printed certificate is an acknowledgment, you should first be sure that the document doesn't require an oath. Look for the words "sworn", "swear", or "affirm" in the document. Many times, if the document is an affidavit, it will open with the wording "Before me personally appeared _________, who being duly sworn deposes and says:". In this instance, the document requires a jurat rather than an acknowledgment, and you should therefore strike out the certificate and replace it with a jurat. If the document doesn't require an oath, you may use the pre-printed acknowledgment certificate. In this case, if the phrase "who did/did not take an oath" appears, you may strike out the entire phrase, or you may strike out the word "did" and underline or circle "did not", so it reads "who did/did not take an oath". You should not simply leave the phrase as is; you must either select an option or strike it completely.

When taking an acknowledgment, an oath is not necessary. An acknowledgment is only an indication by the signer that the signature on the document is their own, and that they executed the document voluntarily, in their authorized capacity, for the purposes therein expressed. This declaration is not sworn to by the signer; it is simply declared or indicated.

Archie v. State, 660 So.2d 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995), discusses "acknowledgments under oath" in its dissenting opinion. The dissenting judge in that case, in reference to an acknowledgment certificate containing the phrase "and who did take an oath", stated:

"An 'acknowledgment', even under oath, is nothing more than a confirmation by [the signer] that the signature is genuine. It is not equivalent to swearing under oath that the facts alleged are true and correct."

Thus, an acknowledgment certificate containing the phrase "who did take an oath" requires the signer of the document to swear that the signature is genuine. Administering such an oath does not make the acknowledgment any more or any less valid; it is, in all reality, completely unnecessary. In addition, you should specifically note that adding the phrase "who did take an oath" to an acknowledgment does not make the certificate a jurat, and it is therefore unacceptable for use on an affidavit or other document requiring an oath to be administered.

If the "who did/did not take an oath" language is printed in a jurat, you must always indicate that the signer did take an oath. If you state that the document was "sworn to", but that an oath was not taken, you are contradicting yourself.

Notary 101: What is the difference between a jurat/oath and an acknowledgment?

The most important thing a notary must know is the difference between an oath and an acknowledgment. Each of these duties are described in detail in previous articles, but a simple explanation is provided in Pina v. Simon-Pina, 544 So.2d 1161 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989):

Confusion often arises between an affidavit and an acknowledgment. Both memorialize acts done before a notary. But, in an affidavit [jurat] [...], the person swearing before the notary must under oath attest that the facts set forth in the document are true. In an acknowledgment, the person merely declares that he executed and signed the document.