Corey v. Moore

Citations

• 86 Va. 721
• 11 S.E. 114
• 1890 Va. LEXIS 37

Syllabus

<p>1. Chancery Practice—Review—After-discovered evidence—Case at bar.—The rule is that petition or bill must set forth, upon affidavit, the discovery of new matter subsequent to the decree, which could not, by reasonable diligence, have been discovered prior thereto, and state its substance—which must be relevant, not merely cumulative, and such as should produce a different result upon another hearing. In case here, held, the petition for rehearing was defective and insufficient.</p> <p>2. Idem—Commissioner’s report—Laches.—Commissioner’s reports conclusive as to any fact he is directed to ascertain, in absence of proof to the contrary; and when a party neglects to avail himself of opportunity to except to it, he cannot again bring the matter before the court, unless there be a rehearing.</p> <p>3. Deed—Acknowledgment before trustee—Case at bar.—Grantee or beneficiary in deed cannot, as an officer, take the acknowledgment of grantor, and deed admitted to record on certificate thereof cannot effect a notice under the registry laws; but when trust deed describes trustee as “L. Triplett, Jr., and the certificate begins ‘‘ I, L. Triplett, Jr., a notary public,” &c., but is signed “L. Triplett, N. P.,” the inference is that the trustee and the notary are different persons.</p> <p>4. Registry—Duty of clerk—Validity.—The clerk is required to admit to record a deed so certified, but that will not preclude an enquiry into the validity of the certificate.</p>