Bohannon v. Hough
Mississippi Supreme Court
That the authorities cited by the counsel for the appellant could not apply in this State. In England, there is no act of Parliament saying what shall constitute a seal, neither was there any statute in Virginia on the subject, at the time the cases quoted from Washington and Munford’s Reports were decided; it was, nevertheless, held in Virginia, that if a scroll was attached to the instrument, and described therein as a seal, it would be held by the Court to he a sealed…
Read the full summary
That the authorities cited by the counsel for the appellant could not apply in this State. In England, there is no act of Parliament saying what shall constitute a seal, neither was there any statute in Virginia on the subject, at the time the cases quoted from Washington and Munford’s Reports were decided; it was, nevertheless, held in Virginia, that if a scroll was attached to the instrument, and described therein as a seal, it would be held by the Court to he a sealed instrument. In the case of Hubbard vs, Beckwith, reported in 1st Bibb’s Reports, page 492, the Supreme Court of Kentucky…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION OF THE COURT — by
chibs' justice TURNER.
The question raised in this case as to the chara'^er of the instrument sued on, has iong since been settled in this Co^c, as recollected by myself and many members of the Bar, and has been the rule in some of the circuits ever since, viz: that an instrument declared on as a sealed instrument» must, on its face, purport to be such — as, “witness my hand and seal,” or other words, shewing that the maker or obligor intended to make a sealed instrument, and that, in the absence of such terms in the body of the instrument, the scroll representing a…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bruner v. KelsoeCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1809