Documents & Sources › DOSSIER 03 notary verification
Rendered from source file
DOSSIER_03_notary_verification.md ·
download raw .mdVERIFIED — Notary John S. Hicks, WA commission #194569
Source: WA Dept. of Licensing License Lookup (https://professions.dol.wa.gov/s/license-lookup),
captured 2026-08-15 (user cleared reCAPTCHA). Screenshot: NOTARY_Hicks_194569.png;
raw text: NOTARY_Hicks_194569_result.txt.
Result (official record)
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Name | John S Hicks |
| License / commission # | 194569 |
| Profession | Notary Public |
| Status | Active |
| Sub-status | None |
| Disciplinary action | None |
| City | Seattle |
What this means (and what it does NOT mean)
- The commission number 194569 matches the name John S Hicks and is a real, currently ACTIVE Washington notary in Seattle with no disciplinary history. This is the same name that appears on all three fraudulent quitclaim deeds and the supporting notices/declarations.
- This is therefore NOT a "fake/forged notary" situation — an important correction to the earlier "unverified" note. Do not allege the notary is fictitious; the record shows otherwise.
- It DOES give investigators a real, identifiable, accountable third party who notarized the fraudulent instruments. That is valuable because:
- If Hicks properly performed the notarizations, then Shroyer, Schermer, and Ingalls personally appeared before him and presented ID — corroborating that the named individuals executed the deeds (helps prove identity/intent).
- WA notaries must keep a journal (RCW 42.45 / WAC 308-30) recording each notarization (date, document, signer ID, signature). Det. Bo Miller can request/subpoena Hicks's journal entries for these dates — a strong evidentiary thread (who appeared, what ID was shown).
- If Hicks did not properly verify identity, or the acknowledgments are defective, that is a notarial-misconduct matter the DOL and the detective can pursue (RCW 42.45.150 / .160) — separate from the deed fraud itself.
Timing note for investigators (from the deed images)
- The deeds were notarized Feb–May 2025. The seal OCR'd as expiration "9-01-25" (one page mis-OCR'd "2/26/25"). The commission shows ACTIVE as of 2026, which means it was either renewed or the commission period differs from the OCR'd seal date — Det. Miller should confirm the exact commission dates and whether a valid commission was in force on each notarization date (02/24/2025, 02/27/2025, 04/01/2025, 04/02/2025, 05/02/2025).
Recommended follow-up (authorities / attorney)
- Ask Det. Miller to obtain Hicks's notary journal entries for the five notarization dates.
- Confirm the exact commission effective/expiration dates with DOL (was a valid commission in force on each date?).
- Interview Hicks: did the three grantors physically appear and present ID? This directly bears on identity, intent, and whether the notarizations were proper.