Wilson v. Quigley

• Decision Date: 02 December 1891
• Citation: 17 S.W. 891,107 Mo. 98
• Parties: WILSON v. QUIGLEY et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

17 S.W. 891

107 Mo. 98

WILSON v. QUIGLEY et al.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

December 2, 1891.

MORTGAGES — CERTIFICATE OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT.

Under Rev. St. 1835, (3d Ed.) pp. 120, 121, § 12, requiring a certificate of acknowledgment to state that the person making the same is personally known to the officer "to be the person whose name is subscribed to the instrument as a party thereto," a certificate of acknowledgment of a mortgage reciting that "W., whose name is signed to the above writing, personally appeared

before me and acknowledged the same," but not stating that the grantor was "personally known" to the officer, is not so defective as to render the mortgage inadmissible as evidence.

Appeal from circuit court, Vernon county; D. P. STRATTON, Judge.

Action of ejectment by Samuel A. Wilson against James Quigley and another. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

M. T. January and T. J. Myers, for appellant. W. J. Stone and Irvine Gordon, for respondents.

GANTT, P. J.

This is an action of ejectment for the north half of section 13, township 35, range 31, in Vernon county, Mo. The defendants deduce their title through two mortgages executed by plaintiff. Plaintiff below, and appellant here, objected to the introduction of these mortgages in evidence, because the certificate of acknowledgment failed to state the grantors were personally "known" to the notaries who took the acknowledgments in Rockbridge county, Va. The form is one used and approved in that state, and is as follows: "State of Virginia, county of Rockbridge, to-wit: I, S. H. Letcher, notary public for the county aforesaid, do hereby certify that Samuel A. Wilson, whose name is signed to the above writing, personally appeared before me and acknowledged the same; and I do further certify that Virginia C., the wife of Samuel A. Wilson, whose name is also signed to the above writing, personally appeared before me, and, having the writing aforesaid fully explained to her, and being examined by me privately and apart from her husband, and acknowledged the same, and does not wish to retract. Given under my hand, this the 27th day of March, 1873. S. H. LETCHER, N. P." As said by Judge SCOTT in Alexander v. Merry, 9 Mo. 310: "It is much to be desired that every officer who takes an acknowledgment of a deed would conform literally to the law. But we know that the convenience of our people requires that the taking of the acknowledgments of deeds should be...