| Index |
| Previous |
| Next |
| Notary Negligence & Fraud Memorandum |
| Copyright © 2009-2013, Marc CAMPUS |
30 March 2007
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
STATEMENT OF ASSIGNMENT
You have asked me to write a brief memorandum of law regarding whether the actions of the Aude
Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession amount to any civil,
criminal or tort liabilities.
ISSUES
1. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed negligence by failing to perform their required duties?
2. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession are members of the conspiracy to invalidate the will and cover up the international violation?
3. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession breached an implied contract while acting in their capacity as public officials?
4. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed a tort of outrage by shifting its responsibilities to MMA?
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
On September 27, 2004, Texas Riding Line Co. filed a claim with the Chamber of the Notaires for the
professional liability of Me Duchan, Notaire. MMA, the insurance company for the Notaires, opened the claims
file by sending a letter to Texas Riding Line Co. with a distorting version of the facts. Also, the Syndic shifted
the responsibility to assess the Notaire liabilities to the insurance company.
If a claimant thinks that his claim is not addressed by the Chamber of the Notaires, he can appeal to the High
Council for the Notarial Profession as did the Plaintiff. However, the High Council for the Notarial Profession
never updated Plaintiff about its findings or decisions although the President of the High Council for the
Notarial Profession was charged to review the case.
Furthermore, after Plaintiff reported the conduct to the agency in charge of regulating the insurance
practices, ACAM failed to conduct a proper investigation regarding the complaint filed by Texas Riding Line
Co. and issued its reply on November 8, 2006 in MMA’s favor asserting that MMA did not commit bad faith or
unfair business practices.
ANAYLSIS
1. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed negligence by failing to perform their required duties?
Plaintiff can assert a claim of negligence alleging that the defendants failed in their duty to exercise ordinary
care in putting into effect the disciplinary power vested to them by law. To establish a case for negligence,
plaintiff must prove that (1) defendants owed a duty to plaintiff, (2) defendants breached that duty, (3)
defendants caused the injury to plaintiff, and (4) plaintiff was injured. The Aude Chamber of Notaires has a
duty to regulate the notaires and impose sanctions for breaches of the rules of professional conduct. The
Aude Chamber of Notaires also adjudicates disputes between clients and their notaires. If a claimant thinks
that his claim is not addressed by the Chamber of the Notaires, he can appeal to the High Council for the
Notarial Profession. In the present case, both the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession breached their duty by failing to address the issue between Plaintiff and Mr. Duchan
(the Notaire). Also, in failing to fulfill their duty, the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession prevented the Plaintiff from receiving relief without delay.
2. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the
Notarial Profession are members of the conspiracy to invalidate the will and cover up the
international violation?
Defendants can be liable under civil conspiracy as well as have penalties assessed against them for criminal
conspiracy. Plaintiff can allege that defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession engaged in a civil conspiracy along with defendants ACAM, MMA and the Notaire. To
prove that a civil conspiracy exits, plaintiff must prove that (1) two or more persons, (2) with an object to be
accomplished, (3) have a meeting of the minds on the object or course of action, (4) on one or more unlawful,
overt acts, and (5) plaintiff suffers damages as a proximate result. The defendants, motivated by their desire
to invalidate the will and cover up an international violation committed by the Notaire, have failed to carry out
their duty allocated to them as a disciplinary body. The Aude Chamber of Notaires states themselves through
their own public literature that “the Chamber of Notaires is your only possible contact concerning disciplinary
matters.” The meeting of the minds can be inferred from the common motivation of ACAM, MMA, the Notaire,
Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession’s actions in preventing the
truth of the international violation and fraudulent misrepresentation by the Notaire.
Defendants will be liable under criminal conspiracy as well. Section 1 of the Sherman Act provides that “every
contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among
several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or
engage in
any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on
conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or if any other
person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the
discretion of the court.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. The Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the
Notarial Profession have sought to interfere with Plaintiff receiving justice from the negligent actions of the
Notaire and compensation from MMA. The actions of the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High
Council for the Notarial Profession will make an extreme impact on the public in regards to failing to have a
proper method to obtain relief when injured by a Notaire or insurance company in France, which will put a
huge restraint on trade.
3. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession breached an implied contract in their capacity as public officials?
Plaintiff may assert that defendants breached their contract and thus should be liable for damages. The Aude
Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession represents an occupation of
honesty and integrity due to its duties of imposing sanctions for breaches of the rules of professional conduct
and being the only possible contact for disciplinary concerns. By accepting the duties and obligations
imposed by the specific offices, defendants entered into an implied contract with the Plaintiff and the public to
use these broad powers according to the law and in good faith. When defendants used its power to conceal
dishonesty and negligence, the defendants breached the contract it had with the Plaintiff and the public.
4. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed a tort of outrage by shifting its responsibilities to MMA?
Plaintiff can assert defendants violated the tort of outrage alleging that the defendants failed in their duty to
exercise ordinary care in exercising the disciplinary power vested to them by law. To establish a claim for the
tort of outrage, Plaintiff must prove that defendants' conduct was so outrageous in character and so extreme
in degree as to go beyond the bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a
civilized society. Defendants’ conduct is shocking to a civilized society and is in violation of public policy
because they clearly state that they are the sole source of rectifying a claim against a notaire due to the
power vested to them by law and the defendants do nothing because of dishonest actions by the Notaire and
MMA. When the facts are so clear, as they are in the present case, to support all allegations against the
Notaire, and the defendants intentionally ignore their responsibility causing the Plaintiff to suffer more
monetary loss, the defendants are liable of committing the tort of outrage.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff has several causes of action to allege against the defendants for
monetary damages, including punitive damages. The above list certainly gives some good arguments against
the defendants’ actions and possible claims that can be asserted in the US courts with the facts presented.
MEMORANDUM OF LAW
STATEMENT OF ASSIGNMENT
You have asked me to write a brief memorandum of law regarding whether the actions of the Aude
Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession amount to any civil,
criminal or tort liabilities.
ISSUES
1. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed negligence by failing to perform their required duties?
2. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession are members of the conspiracy to invalidate the will and cover up the international violation?
3. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession breached an implied contract while acting in their capacity as public officials?
4. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed a tort of outrage by shifting its responsibilities to MMA?
STATEMENT OF THE FACTS
On September 27, 2004, Texas Riding Line Co. filed a claim with the Chamber of the Notaires for the
professional liability of Me Duchan, Notaire. MMA, the insurance company for the Notaires, opened the claims
file by sending a letter to Texas Riding Line Co. with a distorting version of the facts. Also, the Syndic shifted
the responsibility to assess the Notaire liabilities to the insurance company.
If a claimant thinks that his claim is not addressed by the Chamber of the Notaires, he can appeal to the High
Council for the Notarial Profession as did the Plaintiff. However, the High Council for the Notarial Profession
never updated Plaintiff about its findings or decisions although the President of the High Council for the
Notarial Profession was charged to review the case.
Furthermore, after Plaintiff reported the conduct to the agency in charge of regulating the insurance
practices, ACAM failed to conduct a proper investigation regarding the complaint filed by Texas Riding Line
Co. and issued its reply on November 8, 2006 in MMA’s favor asserting that MMA did not commit bad faith or
unfair business practices.
ANAYLSIS
1. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed negligence by failing to perform their required duties?
Plaintiff can assert a claim of negligence alleging that the defendants failed in their duty to exercise ordinary
care in putting into effect the disciplinary power vested to them by law. To establish a case for negligence,
plaintiff must prove that (1) defendants owed a duty to plaintiff, (2) defendants breached that duty, (3)
defendants caused the injury to plaintiff, and (4) plaintiff was injured. The Aude Chamber of Notaires has a
duty to regulate the notaires and impose sanctions for breaches of the rules of professional conduct. The
Aude Chamber of Notaires also adjudicates disputes between clients and their notaires. If a claimant thinks
that his claim is not addressed by the Chamber of the Notaires, he can appeal to the High Council for the
Notarial Profession. In the present case, both the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession breached their duty by failing to address the issue between Plaintiff and Mr. Duchan
(the Notaire). Also, in failing to fulfill their duty, the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession prevented the Plaintiff from receiving relief without delay.
2. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the
Notarial Profession are members of the conspiracy to invalidate the will and cover up the
international violation?
Defendants can be liable under civil conspiracy as well as have penalties assessed against them for criminal
conspiracy. Plaintiff can allege that defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for
the Notarial Profession engaged in a civil conspiracy along with defendants ACAM, MMA and the Notaire. To
prove that a civil conspiracy exits, plaintiff must prove that (1) two or more persons, (2) with an object to be
accomplished, (3) have a meeting of the minds on the object or course of action, (4) on one or more unlawful,
overt acts, and (5) plaintiff suffers damages as a proximate result. The defendants, motivated by their desire
to invalidate the will and cover up an international violation committed by the Notaire, have failed to carry out
their duty allocated to them as a disciplinary body. The Aude Chamber of Notaires states themselves through
their own public literature that “the Chamber of Notaires is your only possible contact concerning disciplinary
matters.” The meeting of the minds can be inferred from the common motivation of ACAM, MMA, the Notaire,
Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession’s actions in preventing the
truth of the international violation and fraudulent misrepresentation by the Notaire.
Defendants will be liable under criminal conspiracy as well. Section 1 of the Sherman Act provides that “every
contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among
several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal. Every person who shall make any contract or
engage in
any combination or conspiracy hereby declared to be illegal shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on
conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or if any other
person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the
discretion of the court.” 15 U.S.C. § 1. The Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the
Notarial Profession have sought to interfere with Plaintiff receiving justice from the negligent actions of the
Notaire and compensation from MMA. The actions of the Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High
Council for the Notarial Profession will make an extreme impact on the public in regards to failing to have a
proper method to obtain relief when injured by a Notaire or insurance company in France, which will put a
huge restraint on trade.
3. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession breached an implied contract in their capacity as public officials?
Plaintiff may assert that defendants breached their contract and thus should be liable for damages. The Aude
Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial Profession represents an occupation of
honesty and integrity due to its duties of imposing sanctions for breaches of the rules of professional conduct
and being the only possible contact for disciplinary concerns. By accepting the duties and obligations
imposed by the specific offices, defendants entered into an implied contract with the Plaintiff and the public to
use these broad powers according to the law and in good faith. When defendants used its power to conceal
dishonesty and negligence, the defendants breached the contract it had with the Plaintiff and the public.
4. Whether defendants Aude Chamber of Notaires and the French High Council for the Notarial
Profession committed a tort of outrage by shifting its responsibilities to MMA?
Plaintiff can assert defendants violated the tort of outrage alleging that the defendants failed in their duty to
exercise ordinary care in exercising the disciplinary power vested to them by law. To establish a claim for the
tort of outrage, Plaintiff must prove that defendants' conduct was so outrageous in character and so extreme
in degree as to go beyond the bounds of decency and to be regarded as atrocious and utterly intolerable in a
civilized society. Defendants’ conduct is shocking to a civilized society and is in violation of public policy
because they clearly state that they are the sole source of rectifying a claim against a notaire due to the
power vested to them by law and the defendants do nothing because of dishonest actions by the Notaire and
MMA. When the facts are so clear, as they are in the present case, to support all allegations against the
Notaire, and the defendants intentionally ignore their responsibility causing the Plaintiff to suffer more
monetary loss, the defendants are liable of committing the tort of outrage.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons stated above, Plaintiff has several causes of action to allege against the defendants for
monetary damages, including punitive damages. The above list certainly gives some good arguments against
the defendants’ actions and possible claims that can be asserted in the US courts with the facts presented.
