Subject: Further to: Recent Ruling by Calif. BOPELs
From: "Ron O. Hamburger" <ROH(--nospam--at)eqe.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 08:55:16 -0700
Thanks to all of you who responded to my post, yesterday, on the BOPELs action
relative to signing of "preliminary" documents.
As a clarification - I do not believe the "Board" members have themseleves been
made aware of this. The "finding" reported in my post was done at the staff
level within the Board. SEAOC is currently working with the SE Board Member, to
see if this can be overturned, and more importantly, if a more sensible ruling
can be put into place.
With regard to the posts, re Texas law - clearly this addresses the same issue
(probably from a previous dispute of similar nature). It is a far more formal
procedure than what has typically been used in California, which is only to sign
documents that are to be relied upon.
By the way, it appears that the BOPELs staff is implying that practice should be
somewhat similar to the Texas approach. They are not demanding a "seal" on
preliminary documents, but rather a signature.
More to come.