When a lawyer or staff member notarizes a client's document, how must the lawyer keep the next signer from seeing the prior client entries in the notarial journal?

Plain-English summary

Under ORS 194.300 an Oregon notary must keep a journal recording the name, address, and signature of the person who signs certain notarized documents, plus the type of document. When lawyers or their staff serve as notaries, the people whose documents are notarized may be clients, and a later signer who fills out the journal could see the earlier entries. The opinion asks what steps a lawyer must take, or have staff take, to protect prior signers' entries.

The opinion grounds the answer in the duty of confidentiality. ORS 9.460(3) requires a lawyer to maintain client confidences and secrets, and Oregon RPC 1.6 broadly protects information relating to the representation of a client. If the information about a prior notarization constitutes or contains protected client information, lawyers must prohibit, and cause their office staff to prohibit, subsequent signers from reviewing those confidences or secrets.

The opinion offers two concrete methods: covering over the names and signatures of other clients at the time of the subsequent signing, or keeping a separate page of the journal for notarial actions that involve protected client information.

In practice

The opinion holds that, under the Oregon confidentiality rules, a lawyer-notary (and the lawyer's staff) must shield prior journal entries that contain protected client information from later signers, and it identifies covering the entries or using a separate journal page as ways to do so. The analysis turns on whether a given entry constitutes or contains protected client information under RPC 1.6 and ORS 9.460(3). Verify the current text of Oregon RPC 1.6 and ORS 194.300 before relying on any specific point.

Common questions

Q: Does the notary journal requirement conflict with client confidentiality?

A: It can. The opinion concludes that where a journal entry contains protected client information, the lawyer must keep subsequent signers from reviewing it.

Q: How do I keep the next signer from seeing a client's prior entry?

A: The opinion identifies two methods: covering the names and signatures of other clients at the time of the next signing, or keeping a separate journal page for notarizations involving protected client information.

Q: Does this duty extend to my non-lawyer staff who act as notaries?

A: Yes. The opinion concludes lawyers must prohibit, and cause their office staff to prohibit, subsequent signers from reviewing protected entries.

Background and rules framework

The opinion interprets Oregon RPC 1.6 (confidentiality of information), corresponding to Model Rule 1.6, against ORS 9.460(3) (statutory duty to maintain confidences) and ORS 194.300 (notarial journal requirement). It extends the confidentiality duty to the conduct of the lawyer's office staff.

Citations and references

Rules of Professional Conduct:

• Oregon RPC 1.6 / Model Rule 1.6 (confidentiality of information)

Statutes:

• ORS 9.460(3) (duty to maintain client confidences and secrets)
• ORS 194.300 (notary journal requirement)

Cases:

• State v. Keenan, 307 Or 515, 771 P2d 244 (1989)

Other opinions cited:

• OSB Formal Ethics Op. No. 2005-81 (rev 2026) (confidentiality)
• OSB Formal Ethics Op. No. 2005-141 (rev 2026) (confidentiality)

See also

• OSB Ethics Op. 2005-23: Former Lawyer and Client Confidences
• OSB Ethics Op. 2005-95: Duty to Report Misconduct

Source

• Landing page: https://www.osbar.org/ethics/toc.html
• Original PDF: https://www.osbar.org/_docs/ethics/2005-96.pdf