Thompson v. Morgan
Supreme Court of Minnesota
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF RAMSEY COUNTY. Points and Authorities for Appellants. I. — The mortgage relied on bearing date 22d October, 1854, which was Sunday, and the acknowledgements of the Notary being of the same date, without his seal of office and attested by but one witness, was not entitled to record, and therefore no notice. Sees. 8, 23, 24, chap. So, Comp.
Read the full summary
APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF RAMSEY COUNTY. Points and Authorities for Appellants. I. — The mortgage relied on bearing date 22d October, 1854, which was Sunday, and the acknowledgements of the Notary being of the same date, without his seal of office and attested by but one witness, was not entitled to record, and therefore no notice. Sees. 8, 23, 24, chap. So, Comp. Stats., 398, 400; Sigourney vs. Samuel, 10 Piole., 72; Kerns vs. Swope, 2 Watts, 75; 44 Maine, 25; 5 Blaokf., 92. . II. — 1The decree is erroneous in providing that a deed be executed to the purchaser upon sale of the…
1Opinion of the Court
By the Oourt —
Flandbau, J.
— The mortgage from Folsom •and wife to Morgan executed on the 23d day of October, 1854, was ineffectual to pass any interest in the land described. It was executed in the presence of one witness only and was attested by only one witness. The statute requires that such instruments must be executed in the presence of two witnesses, who shall subscribe their names to the same as such. Comp. Stats., 398, sec. 8. This point was discussed and decided in the case of Parret vs. Shaubhut, 5 Minn. R., 323. We there held that a mortgage of lands with only one. witness was not…
2Cited by11 opinions
- Forster v. ForsterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1880
- Maxwell v. HartmannWisconsin Supreme Court · 1881
- Piland v. . TaylorSupreme Court of North Carolina · 1893
- Brooks v. OwenSupreme Court of Missouri · 1892
- Darling v. PurcellNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1904
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.