Flashcards Studio

In an action for collection on a written contract, a real estate broker sues a client for unpaid commission based on a notarized Broker’s Agreement signed by the client and acknowledged before a notary public. The client denies executing the agreement and alleges forgery. The plaintiff invokes Rule 131, Sec. 2, contending that the notarized agreement creates a conclusive presumption of due execution and authenticity.   (a)Identify the central issue regarding conclusive presumptions in this context. (b)Distinguish conclusive presumptions from rebuttable presumptions in this context. (c)Apply the rule to the facts: does the notarized Broker’s Agreement trigger a conclusive presumption of its validity, or is it merely evidence subject to rebuttal? Explain your conclusion and its practical effect on the case.