Case ID: nys_128/html/0749-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "SCUDDFR, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

(70 Misc. Rep. 320.)
    HEATON v. GRISWOLD et al.
    (Supreme Court, Special Term, New York County.
    January, 1911.)
    Acknowledgment (§ 36)—Certificate—Sufficiency—Residence of Witness.
    Under the statute in force in 1803, requiring the certificate of acknowledgment made by la subscribing witness to a deed to state the witness’, place of residence, where it appeared from the deed itself that the grantor resided in New Jersey, a certificate stating that the acknowledging witness “resides in the city of Bergen, in the state,” the name of the state being omitted, was sufficient, though when the acknowledgment was taken the former city of Bergen, in New Jersey, had been consolidated' with Jersey City.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Acknowledgment, Cent. Dig. §§ 181, 182; Dec. Dig. § 36.]
    Action by Mary Adelaide Heaton against Almon W. Griswold and •others. On motion to compel purchaser at judicial sale to complete liis purchase.
    Motion granted.
    Mornay Williams, for plaintiff.
    C. H. & J. A. Young, for Almon W. Griswold.
    Lynn C. Norris, for purchaser.
    
      
       For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes
    
   SCUDDFR, J.

Motion to compel a purchaser at a judicial sale to complete his purchase. The purchaser claims that the title is doubtful and unmarketable by reason of a defective acknowledgment in-a deed in the chain of title.

The acknowledgment which is questioned was taken in 1893, in the city, county, and state of New York, and was made by a subscribing witness. The statute then in force required the certificate ■of such an acknowledgment to state the witness’ place of residence. The certificate in question states that the acknowledging witness “resides in the city of Bergen, in the state”; the name of the state being omitted. Although at the time when the acknowledgment was taken the former city of Bergen, in the state of New Jersey, had been consolidated with Jersey City, nevertheless the locality of the former city remained a matter of general knowledge, and the name Bergen, or city of Bergen, continued to be used to a greater or less extent in describing such locality. It also appears from the deed itself that the .grantor named therein resided in New Jersey, at Hackensack.

From these facts and circumstances, it seems to me that the certificate sufficiently describes the place of residence of the acknowledging witness, or at least sufficiently furnishes information from which it may be ascertained.

Motion granted. Settle order on notice.