Wilcox v. Bergman

Decision Date17 November 1905
Citation96 Minn. 219,104 N.W. 955
PartiesWILCOX v. BERGMAN et al.
CourtMinnesota Supreme Court

OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE

Appeal from District Court, Pine County; F. M. Crosby, Judge.

Action by C. H. Wilcox against Christina C. Bergman and August Bergman. Judgment for defendant. From an order denying a new trial, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

Syllabus by the Court

Copies of the record of deeds and other similar private writings made in a sister state are admissible in evidence in the courts of this state, under the provisions of Rev. St. U. S. § 906 [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 677] when properly certified and authenticated.

But they will be given such force and effect only as is given thereto by the law of the state from which they are taken, and it must appear that the record was one which was authorized and provided for by the statutes of that state.

No presumption exists that the statutory law of a sister state is the same as that of this state. C. D. Austin and Robert C. Saunders, for appellant.

Gjertsen & Lund, for respondents.

BROWN, J.

This action was brought to recover damages for the alleged fraud of defendants in conveying certain property to a third person after having previously conveyed it by warranty deed to plaintiff. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the defendant Christina Bergman was on the 10th day of August, 1900, the owner of the land mentioned, and that she and her husband, defendant August Bergman, for a valuable consideration, conveyed the same by warranty deed to plaintiff; that by inadvertance plaintiff neglected to record the deed in the office of the register of deeds, as required by the laws of the state of North Dakota, where the land was located; that thereafter, in February, 1902, defendants conveyed the same land by warranty deed to one A. L. Beggs, an innocent purchaser for value and without notice of the prior deed; and that Beggs in turn conveyed to one Rickords, who was also an innocent purchaser for value and without notice of the deed to plaintiff. Both the later deeds were, the complaint alleges, duly recorded in the proper office of the register of deeds of North Dakota. The complaint also alleges that provision is made by the statutes of the state of North Dakota for the record of all deeds and other instruments affecting the title to real property located in that state, and that by reason of the record of the deeds to Beggs and Rickords plaintiff has been wholly deprived of the property conveyed to him by his unrecorded deed. The answer is a general denial. When the case came on for trial plaintiff offered in evidence the deed claimed to have been executed and delivered to him by defendants, which was received over defendants' objection, and then offered a copy of the deeds to Beggs and Rickords, properly certified by the register of deeds of Dickey county, N. D., wherein they were recorded. These documents were objected to on the ground that ‘there is no statute in Minnesota authorizing the introduction in evidence of recorded title in a foreign state by certified evidence,’ and on the further ground that the evidence was incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial, and not the best evidence. The objection was sustained, whereupon plaintiff rested his case, and on motion of defendants it was dismissed for failure on the part of plaintiff to prove the allegations of his complaint. Thereafter plaintiff moved for a new trial, and appealed from an order denying it.

The only question presented for consideration upon this appeal is whether the court below erred in excluding the certified copies of the North Dakota records. It is apparent from the settled case that the objection to the introduction of these documents was sufficient to call attention to the real point affecting their admissibility. The court evidently ruled on the theory that, inasmuch as there is no statute in this state expressly authorizing the introduction in evidence of foreign nonjudicial records, certified copies thereof are inadmissible, and that the act of Congress providing that properly exemplified copies of such records shall be received in evidence in all courts was not applicable. The objection must therefore be treated as sufficient to raise the question whether at the time the documents were offered on the trial below they were competent and admissible to prove, not only the record, but the execution, of the deeds. It may be stated in this connection that plaintiff did not offer the statutes of North Dakota, referred to in the complaint, providing for and authorizing the record of such instruments, nor any statute or rule of court making certified copies competent evidence in the courts of that state.

The Constitution of the United States (article 4, § 1) provides that full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records, and judicial proceedings of every other state, and that Congress may prescribe the manner in which such acts and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof. In 1790, by authority of this provision of the Constitution, Congress prescribed the manner in which judicial acts and proceedings might be proven in the courts of the several states, but made no provision respecting the proof of other records. Section 906, Rev. St. U. S. [U. S. Comp. St. 1901, p. 677], covering all records other than those of a judicial character, was enacted in 1804. That act provides and declares that all records and other exemplifications of books kept in any public office in any state or territory of the United States, not appertaining to a court, shall be proved and admitted in any court in any other state or territory by the proper attestation of the keeper of the records or books and the certificate of the presiding judge of the county or district in which such office may be kept that the attestation thereto is in due form and by the proper officer; and it further provides that records so authenticated shall have such faith and credit given them in every court within the United States as they have by the law of the state from which they are taken. There is no question in the case at bar that the records here sought to be introduced in evidence were properly authenticated as required by this act of Congress; but, as already stated, there was no offer of the statutes of North Dakota, from which the records came, either showing that such records were there provided for, or showing the effect given to properly authenticated copies as evidence in that state. We have no statute in this state under which certified copies of documents, not of a judicial nature, coming from a sister state, may be used as evidence in our courts. Judicial records are provided for, but records of that nature only (Gen. St. 1894, § 5706); and the question presented is whether the act of Congress is valid as a rule of evidence by which the courts of this state are controlled.

Whether Congress may establish a rule of evidence for state courts, and whether the act of Congress just referred to is binding upon the courts of the several states, is a question that has been more or less discussed by the various state courts. By the later authorities the rule is laid down that the act of Congress is a valid exercise of the power given by the Constitution, and binding on the state courts. The better opinion is that the act of Congress should be sustained, not only because authorized by the Constitution, but for the further reason that it establishes a uniform, definite, and certain rule by which official records in the several states may be shown. If the record of instruments be provided for by the laws of the several states, and certified copies thereof made evidence in the state where made, either by statute or rule of court, no reason occurs to us why the act of Congress should not be applied and enforced by the courts of all other states. Its enactment was clearly within the terms of the Constitution, for authority is there conferred to prescribe rules of evidence, not only with reference to judicial acts and records, but all other official...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT