Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1899-05-18
ABOUT ACKNOWLEDGE
MENTS.
SUPREME COURT DECIDES Law
CASE.

CASE.
An Acknowledgment OF Married Woman
Cannot be Impeached Except on
Positive Evidence.
Another case involving the
method Of taking the acknowledge
ment OF q married woman has been
decided by the supreme court. 1t
is the case Of Y. e. Gray, respon-
dent, VS.. Frederick W. Law, adj
minlstrator, ct al, appellants, from
Bear Lake county, tue Judgment Of
the lower court being reversed,
Law is the administrator OF the
estate Of Hannah b. Humphreys,
deceased. X. S. Spence and wife
gave Mrs. Humphreys Il mortgage.
This mortgage was forclosed by
the administrator They gave
another mortgage to Gray, who
brought this to foreclose his mort
gage and for cancellation of the
decree Of foreclosure OF the Hum
phrey mortgage and certificate OF
sheriff 5 sale hereunder.
Gray attacks the wlfes acknow-
Judgement on the Humphrey mort.
gage on the grounds THAT she
never appeared before the officer
purportng to take acknowledge
ment thereto; that he never made
her acquainted with the contents
Of sad pretended mortgage separate
and apart from and without tht
hearing OF her husband" When
the case was tried Spence and his
wife both testified on behalf Of tht
plaintiff. Spence said that he
drew up the mortgage, had hi
wife sign it, took it to the acknow
Lodging officer, told the latter
that it was his Wife's signature
and the officer certified 1t; tina
the officer did not go to his wife's
house to see her before the certifi
cate was made He thought hi
saw the officer attach his certiti-
cate. On cross examination he
admitted the officer lived very neal
his house and would not say posi-
lively that he had not called ther,
to see Mrs. Spence. Mrs. Spene,
testified she did not appear before
the officer and acknowledge to hin
that she consented to the mort
gage. On cross examination sht
said she had signed the mortgage
voluntarily.
In his answer in the suit TO
foreclosure Of the Humphrey's
. mortgage, Spence admitted the ex
ecution and delivery of the mort
gage by hin self and wife.
The opinion which is by justice
Sullivan, calls attention 20 the un
certainty Of spence's testimony
: and says:
, "The testimony of said witnes.
is contradictory, and most un.
satisfactory, while the testimony
of his wife would indicate that sh
. did not appear before the office
] "and acknowledge to him that SIN
, consented to mortgage her home t.
{ Mrs. Humphreys"
g IF courts of justice permit mort
, cages and deeds Of real estate to b
, held void and set at naughu OF
such contradictory and unsatis
factory evidence given by partie
!. making them, security and per
q manency to titles to real estat
& will be thing of the past.
, THE evidence to impeach a Ger,
Il tifieate Of acknowledgement mus
be very clear and convincing be
yond reasonable doubt. Tn
n evidence in the case at bar is nc
9 of the high character required b
r that rule.
- "rhe certificate Of acknowledg
b ment to the mortgage under con
Y sideration, is in substantial com
pliance with the provisions Of til
= statutes in rega.d TO ack dowledg
;. ments Of married women. Sectio
:. 1850, revised statutes, 1887.
!. I'm this case the woman is nj
"a contesting the validity of sal
r mortgage, but a subsequent NOR
If gage with notice.
% awhile it is true Spence ar
. wife are not attacking said NOR
Il gage directly, their mortgage