Sowers v. Peterson

Citations

• 59 Tex. 216
• 1883 Tex. LEXIS 135

Syllabus

<p>I. Acknowledgment op deed.— Under the act of May 12, 1846 (Hart. Dig-., art. 2798), the certificate of acknowledgment of the clerk to a deed reciting that the grantor, naming him, “ who was made known and acknowledged the execution, signing and delivering” the deed, if formal in other respects, was sufficient to admit the deed to record, though the proof of the identity of the grantor was not indorsed thereon. Monroe v. Arledge, 23 Tex., 479.; Watkins v. Hall, 57 Tex., 3, and Mullins. v. Weaver, 57 Tex., 6, followed.</p> <p>2. Evidence — Practice.— When the certificate of acknowledgment to a deed is illegible, and a certified copy is exhibited which shows that it had once existed, formal and perfect, the proper practice is not to read the copy, but the original as a recorded instrument.</p> <p>3. Authentication.— Under the registration act of May 12, 1846, the fact -that a subscribing witness who proved up a deed for record stated that he signed the deed at the request of-, without alleging that it was the grantor who asked him, was immaterial, when, in the same connection, he stated under oath, on the day when the instrument was made, that the grantor did in fact acknowledge on that day that he executed the deed for the purposes and considerations therein expressed. Deen v. Wills, 21 Tex., 644, followed.</p> <p>4. Registration.— Under the present registration law, a stricter rule of construction will be observed than that applicable to the law of 1846.</p> <p>5. Tenant in common.— A tenant in common, not being in actual exclusive possession of land, who sets forth in his petition the extent of his interest-, may in trespass to try title recover, as against a naked trespasser, the entire property. Read v. Allen, 56 Tex., 176, and other cases, cited and followed.</p> <p>6. Revised statutes.— See opinion for a specification of the changes effected in the statute in regard to actions of trespass to try title.</p>