The named notary had reported her seal missing in August.

The report predated the November certificate.

She denied performing the act or authorizing use of the seal on my document.

A missing-seal report did not identify who took it.

It did establish a history that conflicted with the appearance of routine certification.

Martin’s involvement and the route by which the seal reached the paper required their own evidence.

When his lawyer addressed the statement, Martin acknowledged that he had found the seal among archived materials available to him from his old clerical work.

He had not verified authority to use it.