Legal Opinion

Staten v. Shumate

Supreme Court of Alabama

Decided June 18, 1942No. 8 Div. 172PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOSTER, Justice.

The question here is whether the right to foreclose the mortgage involved was lost by prescription of twenty years, and also whether the mortgage was valid because the wife’s name does not appear in the body of the mortgage though it is signed by her and proper certificate of acknowledgment attached, when the land is the homestead of the husband.

The last question has long since been settled, so that it is not necessary that her name appear in the body of the deed if she signs and a separate acknowledgment is taken and certified. Flood v. Powell, 73 Ala. 171; Shelton v. Aultman…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Coyle v. WilkinsSupreme Court of Alabama · 1876
  2. Patterson v. WeaverSupreme Court of Alabama · 1927
  3. Scott v. ScottSupreme Court of Alabama · 1918
  4. Hendley v. First Nat. Bank of HuntsvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1937
  5. Goodwyn v. BaldwinSupreme Court of Alabama · 1877

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Morris v. YanceySupreme Court of Alabama · 1958
  2. Woods v. SandersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1946
  3. Walker v. ColeySupreme Court of Alabama · 1956
  4. Kilgore v. GambleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1950
  5. McGlaughn v. PearmanSupreme Court of Alabama · 1944

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API