Meriam v. Harsen
New York Court of Chancery
Prior to the twenty-eighth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, Mrs. Catharine Harsen, the wife of Jacob Harsen, was seized in fee- of certain real estate.
Read the full summary
Prior to the twenty-eighth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, Mrs. Catharine Harsen, the wife of Jacob Harsen, was seized in fee- of certain real estate. The bill in this suit was filed to set aside a deed of it made the twenty-eighth day of May in the said year one thousand seven hundred and ninety, (for the consideration of five shillings,) by the said Jacob and Catharine Harsen to Gabriel Furman and, in that -way, also, destroy a deed dated the day after (the twenty-ninth day of May, 1790,) whereby the said-Gabriel Furman, in consideration of ten shillings, reconveyed to…
1Opinion of the Court
The Vice-Chancellor.
The first question to he considered is, as to the sufficiency of the acknowledgment by Catherine Harsen, the wife, of the deed of conveyance from herself and husband to Gabriel Furman, of the twenty-eighth day of May, one thousand seven hundred and ninety, to pass her estate ?
The statute of one thousand seven hundred and eighty-eight, then in force, (2 Greenl. 99,) declares, that no estate of a feme covert shall thenceforth pass by her deed, without a previous acknowledgment by her, on a private examination apart from her husband, that she executed such deed freely,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Trustees of Canandarqua Academy v. McKechnieNew York Court of Appeals · 1882
- Riley v. WilsonTexas Supreme Court · 1893
- Smith v. . BoydNew York Court of Appeals · 1886
- Walcott v. RonaldsThe Superior Court of New York City · 1863
- Ross v. WiggNew York Supreme Court · 1884