Newton v. Emerson, Talcott & Co.

Citations

• 66 Tex. 142
• 18 S.W. 348
• 1886 Tex. LEXIS 468

Syllabus

<p>1. Deed—Acknowledgment—Signature—The acknowledgment of N. to a paper which he presented, was taken by a proper officer in 1871. The instrument was neither written nor signed by N., but had been prepared at his request, and conveyed certain of his property to his wife. After acknowledging the instrument, he filed it for record, and thereafter made verbal statements to his wife and other relations to the same effect as expressed in the instrument. Held:</p> <p>(1) The acknowledgment was a recognition and adoption of every word then upon the instrument.</p> <p>(2) By the acknowledgment and subsequent delivery, N. declared and made his name or signature then on the paper the evidence of his intention, in reference to giving it validity and effect, as fully as though the name had been written by himself. (Authorities cited.)</p> <p>(3) Such evidence and declaration must be deemed true and effective, unless the instrument, considered as having been written by the person named as maker, could not, in law, be regarded as signed.</p> <p>(4) A deed or other instrument may be said to be signed whenever the name of its maker is so written upon it as to evidence his intention to give authenticity to it. See opinion for facts held sufficient manifestation of such intention.</p> <p>2. Practice—Supreme court—If the facts stated in a petition, a general exception to which has been sustained, are not sufficient to warrant a judgment different from that rendered upon the exception, the supreme court will not reverse and' remand the case, although errors of law may have been committed.</p>