Court Opinion

ID: 9834316
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 23:28:45.547258+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:44:13.715438
License: Public Domain

On Motions for Rehearing.
Both the appellants and the appellees have filed motions for a rehearing. Appellants insist that we erroneously held that the certificate of the officer taking an acknowledgment of a married woman is conclusive of the facts therein set forth, unless fraud or imposition is alleged. They contend that, where the grantee of the instrument is present at the time of the acknowledgment and knows that it does not recite the true facts, no such allegation is necessary, but that an allegation that he is present is sufficient. This contention is correct, but we thought 'it not applicable to this case, because the lessee or grantee who was alleged to be present af the time the acknowledgment was taken is not a party to the suit, and it is further alleged that the defendants, appellees here, are the assignees -of all the rights, etc., of the lessee, and no allegation is made that they had any notice that the husband of the married woman was present when her acknowledgment was taken, and without such allegation they stand as innocent purchasers. With this explanation, both the motions for a rehearing are overruled.
Motions overruled.