58 Mo. 565 | Mo. | 1875
Lead Opinion
delivered the opinion of the court.
Black, the plaintiff, instituted this proceeding to redeem certain lands in Jackson County, sold at a trustee’s sale. The case was submitted upon the following agreed statement of
Upon this agreed statement, the court found for defendants, ’and dismissed the petition; and this ruling is assigned for error.
Although the acknowledgment was worthless, (Stephens vs. Hampton, 46 Mo., 404; Dail vs. Moore, 51 Mo., 589,) yet the deed was valid between the parties, and the agreed statement admits its execution. The chief object of a certificate of acknowledgment, is, in order to admit the deed to registry. It is only where the rights of third persons intervene — i. e. purchasers etc. for a valuable consideration without actual notice — that recording a deed or other instrument becomes necessary; and under our statute, the due acknowledgment of the instrument, evidenced by a proper certificate thereof, is a condition precedent to registration.
As to the other point involved in the record, I shall content myself by merely referring to the recent case of Dejar
For these reasons it only remains to affirm tbe judgment' of the court below.
delivered a separate opinion.
I concur in affirming tbe judgment in this case, but do not wish to be understood as yielding assent to the views entertained by tbe majority of the court in the case of DeJarnette vs. DeGiverville, (56 Mo., 440). Nor do I conceive that tbe questions discussed and decided there, arise in this case, as it ■ does not even appear from tlie agreed statement, where Blaclc and Hughes & Gregg were domiciled at the time of the execution of the trust deed, or at tbe maturity of tbe notes secured thereby.
Dissenting Opinion
delivered the di.ssenting opinion.
I dissent from the opinion of tlie court in this case.