Woodhead v. Foulds
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
CASE 35 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM PENDLETON CIRCUIT COURT. CITED 5 Bush, 400, Sharp’s adm’r v. Proctor’s adm’r. 2 Metcalfe, 235, Smith v. Wilson. 2 Metcalfe, 503, Johnson v. Ferguson. 5 Hill’s New York, 158, Forbay v. Ferguson. 2 Bush, 218, Willis and wife v. Woodward. 7 Bush, Ford v. Teal. 5 Bush, 562, Martin v. Davidson. 1 Duvall, 34, Allen v. Shortridge.
Read the full summary
CASE 35 — PETITION EQUITY APPEAL FROM PENDLETON CIRCUIT COURT. CITED 5 Bush, 400, Sharp’s adm’r v. Proctor’s adm’r. 2 Metcalfe, 235, Smith v. Wilson. 2 Metcalfe, 503, Johnson v. Ferguson. 5 Hill’s New York, 158, Forbay v. Ferguson. 2 Bush, 218, Willis and wife v. Woodward. 7 Bush, Ford v. Teal. 5 Bush, 562, Martin v. Davidson. 1 Duvall, 34, Allen v. Shortridge. Revised Statutes, sec. 22, chap. 24, 1 Stanton, 282. CITED Revised Statutes, sec. 22, chap. 24, 1 Stanton, 282. Webster’s Dictionary, “Evidence.” Tomlin’s Law Dictionary, “Evidence.” 1 Blackstone, 130. 5 Hill’s New York, 155. 1 Duvall,…
1Opinion of the CourtChief Justice Robertson
It satisfactorily appears in this case that, in taking the acknowledgment of the wife of the deed mortgaging her own land to secure her husband’s debt, the clerk, who certified only that she acknowledged the deed before him, neither read nor explained it to her, and that the husband was present when her acknowledgment was taken. While the clerk testifies that he presumes that he did all that the law required, but does not recollect either the husband’s presence or that the deed was read or explained, two other credible witnesses, who were present, testify positively and oiraumstantially that…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Hughes & Co. v. ColemanCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1874
- Bradley's Ex'rs v. LylesCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1874
- Jett v. RogersCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1877
- Paxton v. MarshallUnited States Circuit Court · 1883