Mason v. Brock
Illinois Supreme Court
The agreed case presented to the .Court for- consideration,, states that plaintiff sued defendant on two notes, given in 1836,. for the price of certain lots in Grafton, sold by Sarah Mason as-guardian, &c. The defendant, for defence, relied upon the want of title at the time of the institution of this suit.
Read the full summary
The agreed case presented to the .Court for- consideration,, states that plaintiff sued defendant on two notes, given in 1836,. for the price of certain lots in Grafton, sold by Sarah Mason as-guardian, &c. The defendant, for defence, relied upon the want of title at the time of the institution of this suit. For replication,. the plaintiff relied upon the fact, that Mrs. Allen, who had the title in fee to said lots on the 17th May, 1842, had, with her husband, William H. Allen, tendered a deed of that date, conveying the same to the defendant, before the institution of this suit; and offered…
1Opinion of the CourtTreat, C. J.
The only question in this case, relates to the validity of a deed made by a husband and wife, for the purpose of conveying the real estate of the latter. A married woman can only be divested of her real estate in the mode prescribed by statute. The certificate of acknowledgment, is an essential part of the due execution of a deed, by which the real estate of a feme covert is to be transferred \ and unless it is in substantial compliance with the statute, no title passes. Mariner v. Saunders, 5 Gilman, 113; Hughes v. Lane, 11 Illinois, 123.
The only objection taken to the deed in question, is,…
2Cited by5 opinions
- Muncie National Bank v. BrownIndiana Supreme Court · 1887
- State v. ClitesOhio Court of Appeals · 1991
- Oelbermann v. IdeWisconsin Supreme Court · 1896
- Lindley v. SmithIllinois Supreme Court · 1868
- Smith v. TimNew York Court of Common Pleas · 1884