Barker v. Circle
Supreme Court of Missouri
Error to Carroll Circuit Court. I. The acknowledgment was not in conformity to the law in force at the time of its execution and does not pass the wife’s interest in land.
Read the full summary
Error to Carroll Circuit Court. I. The acknowledgment was not in conformity to the law in force at the time of its execution and does not pass the wife’s interest in land. (See Chauvin vs. Wagner, 18 Mo., 516 ; McDaniel vs. Priest, 12 Mo., 516.) In those cases the deed embraced but one tract owned by the wife, and the Court say that the words, “ and relinquished her dower” may be stricken out as superfluous; but in this case, as the land belonged both to husband and wife, the words, “ and relinquished her dower” cannot be stricken out as superfluous, because they are the words required by the…
1Opinion of the CourtHough, Judge
This was an action of ejectment brought in the Carroll Circuit Court, for the recovery of the possession of onehmidred and twenty acres of land in section 9, T. 51, R. 22.
*261The defendant, in bis answer, set up in substance the following facts: That, in the year 1840 or 1841, the plaintiff, then being a married woman, purchased the property in controversy from one Eobert H. Courts, who was at that time the owner thereof, and paid for the same, with her own money, the sum of five dollars per acre, and went into possession thereof, under said purchase, and, thereby, became entitled to a deed, from…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Reese v. SmithSupreme Court of Missouri · 1849
3Cited by8 opinions
- Wadkins v. WatsonTexas Supreme Court · 1893
- Throckmorton v. PenceSupreme Court of Missouri · 1894
- Powell v. BowenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1919
- Corrigan v. BellSupreme Court of Missouri · 1880
- Crismond v. KendrickSupreme Court of Missouri · 1930
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.