Gustine v. Westenberger

Citations

• 224 Pa. 455
• 73 A. 913
• 1909 Pa. LEXIS 824

Syllabus

<p>Mortgage — Acknowledgment—Forgery—Evidence.</p> <p>1. On the trial of a scire facias sur mortgage where forgery is set up as a defense, it is proper for the court to refuse to charge that the notary’s certificate of acknowledgment is sufficient and strong evidence of the genuineness of the mortgage, where the defendant denies that he executed the paper, the notary is unable to identify the defendant as the man who had signed it, three other persons testify that they saw the mortgage signed and that the person who signed it was not the defendant, and the wife of the defendant testifies that she procured her brother to personate her husband in the execution of the mortgage. Such a case is not one of a certificate of a notary before whom the real mortgagor actually appeared and an effort is made to contradict that to which the officer certifies.</p> <p>2. There is no rule of law which permits a husband’s property to be taken from him by a deed forged by his wife, or the forgery of which was procured by her.</p>