Brown

This is an action against a notary public and his sureties for damages alleged to have resulted from the negligence of the notary. The facts in regard to this case, as we get them from the record here, are as follows: On May 26, 1916, Martin L. Kelsey and Anna B. Kelsey, his wife, were, and for many years prior thereto had been, and now are, the owners of lots 15, 16, and 17, in block 9, of Van Ness Square, in Los Angeles City, and such ownership was then shown in the proper records of Los Angeles County. Prior to said May 26, 1914, one Leonard C. Canfield conceived a felonious scheme to obtain money by forging the names of Kelsey and his wife, and the notarial certificate of their acknowledgments to a deed purporting to convey said property to a fictitious person as grantee, and placing such forged deed of record; and then, assuming the name of such fictitious grantee, to sell said property to such person as he might be able to victimize. In furtherance of this scheme said Canfield forged the names of Kelsey and his wife to a deed purporting to grant said property to a fictitious grantee designated as Helmer E. Rabild, and attached thereto a forged certificate of acknowledgment…

The application for a hearing in this court after decision by the district court of appeal of the second appellate district, division two, is denied.

[1] We base our denial solely upon the fact that it clearly appears that any negligence on the part of the notary, Eives, was not a proximate cause of the injury to plaintiff.

We deem it proper to further point out that in the case of Anderson v. Aronsohn, 28 Cal. App. Dec. 216, which is referred to in the opinion, the decision of the district court of appeal was vacated by this court and the cause ordered to a hearing herein, where it is now pending.

All the Justices concurred.

This is an action against a notary public and his sureties for damages alleged to have resulted from, the negligence of the notary.

The facts in regard to this case, as we get them from the record here, are as follows:

On or about June 10, 1914, said Canfield called plaintiff on the telephone and stated to plaintiff that the person speaking was Helmer E. Rabild, and offered to sell and convey said three lots to plaintiff for $4,750, subject to taxes for the current year. In the same conversation he stated that he would furnish certificates of title issued by the Title Insurance and Trust Company, showing title to said property vested in plaintiff, free from all encumbrances, except taxes and certain building restrictions. Plaintiff accepted this proposition over the telephone, and in the same conversation stated that he would instruct the Title Insurance and *484 Trust Company to pay $4,750 when it could issue its certificates that title to said property appeared from the records of Los Angeles County vested in plaintiff. In furtherance of said scheme Canfield prepared a deed of said property, in which the name of Helmer B. Rabild appeared as grantor and Geo. W. Brown as…