Perkins v. Carter
| Decision Date | 31 March 1855 |
| Citation | 20 Mo. 465 |
| Parties | PERKINS, Respondent, v. CARTER, Appellant. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
1. The mere addition of the words, “and relinquishes her dower,” in the certificate of a married woman's acknowledgment of a conveyance of her own estate will not avoid the deed as to her. (Chauvin v. Wagner, 18 Mo., 531, upon this point, affirmed.)
Appeal from Lincoln Circuit Court.
This action was brought by the heir of Sarah A. Perkins, to recover possession of a tract of land in Lincoln county. The defendant claimed title under a deed executed by Sarah A. Perkins (to whom the land was patented before her marriage) and her husband, Charles E. Perkins. The certificate of acknowledgment to this deed was as follows:
“State of Missouri, county of Lincoln, ss. Be it remembered that, on the 20th day of October, A. D. 1841, before me, the clerk of the county court of Lincoln county, Missouri, personally appeared Charles E. Perkins and Sarah Ann, his wife, both personally known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the foregoing instrument of writing as having executed the same, and severally acknowledged the same to be their own free act and deed for the purposes therein mentioned. The said Sarah Ann being first examined by me separate and apart from her said husband, first being made acquainted with the contents thereof, says she executed the same deed, and relinquishes her right of dower to the land therein mentioned, voluntarily and freely, of her own accord without any undue influence of her said husband. Taken and certified and given under my hand and seal of office, the day and year above written.
| (L. S.) |
FRANCIS PARKER, Clerk.”
It did not appear in the body of the deed that the estate conveyed belonged to the wife. The Circuit court held that it was insufficient to divest her title. After verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, the defendant appealed.
Mr. Glover, Mr. Gantt and Mr. Polk, for appellant, relied upon Chauvin v. Wagner. (18 Mo. 531.)
Mr. Broadhead, for respondent, attempted to distinguish this case from Chauvin v. Wagner, by the fact that here it did not appear in the deed itself, with the contents of which the wife was certified to have been made acquainted, that she was conveying her own estate.
This was an action brought by the respondent to recover possession of a tract of land claimed by her as the heir of her mother. From the form of the certificate of acknowledgment to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thornton v. Nat'l Exch. Bank
...this case was overruled, and Chauvin v. Wagner has been followed in Delassus v. Poston, 19 Mo. 425; Thomas v. Meier, 18 Mo. 573, Perkins v. Carter, 20 Mo. 465, and Thomas v. Hesse, 34 Mo. 13. 5. PRINCIPAL AND SURETY: securities taken by surety. Plaintiffs in error rely upon the doctrine tha......
-
Hauser v. Murray
...conveyed all the interest they both had in fee in said lands to David H. Quesenberry, and subject to the provisions of said deed. Perkins v. Carter, 20 Mo. 465; Chauvin v. Lowne, 23 Mo. 223; Miller Powell, 53 Mo. 252; Burnett v. McCulley, 78 Mo. 688; Long v. Timmons, 107 Mo. 519. (7) The tr......
-
Bachman v. H. R. Ennis Real Estate & Inv. Co.
...the grantee. This was in 1853. In 1854 Delassus v. Poston, 19 Mo. 425, 431, followed and approved Chauvin v. Wagner. In 1855, in Perkins v. Carter, 20 Mo. 465, tie question was before the court again, and it was said that the matter was "settled" in Chauvin v. Wagner, and that it made no di......
-
Thomas v. Hesse
...omitted words “relinquishes dower,” it was not good; 19 Mo. 426, held relinquishment of dower by a woman owning estate, passed her estate; 20 Mo. 465, took stronger ground, departing from the words of the law to uphold deed. VI. The court erred in striking out the part of the answer in refe......