Bell's Adm'r v. Lyle

78 Tenn. 44
CourtTennessee Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 15, 1882
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 78 Tenn. 44 (Bell's Adm'r v. Lyle) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Tennessee Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bell's Adm'r v. Lyle, 78 Tenn. 44 (Tenn. 1882).

Opinion

Deaderick, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The bill is filed to • foreclose a mortgage upon a house and lot in Bristol to secure a debt due complainant.

The only objection insisted on in argument to the relief prayed for is made upon behalf of the wife, upon the ground that her privy examination is defective and does not convey her right of homestead. The objection is that the clerk’s certificate to said privy examination, does not contain the words “ with whom I am personally acquainted.” The form of certificate given in section 2042 of the Code, does contain these words, which have been held essential to its validity, in the ordinary conveyance of a vendor. But section. [45]*452076 of the Code, is the one which prescribes the form of the certificate as to the wife’s signature. He is required to sign -the deed jointly with his wife, hut not necessarily at the same time. The certificate prescribed by section 2042 of the Code is sufficient as to him, and that given in section 2076 is required to be made by the clerk as to the wife. He certifies that he is acquainted with the husband, but by section 2076 is not required to make a similar certificate as to the 'wife.

The certificate of the officer is in conformity with the statute, and by its terms is valid and binding upon the parties executing and conveyed the right of homestead.

The chancellor so held and rendered a decree in favor of complainant, and it will be affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

In Re Akins
87 S.W.3d 488 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2002)
In Re: Ronald Lebron Akins, Sr.
Tennessee Supreme Court, 2002
Collins v. Binkley
750 S.W.2d 737 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1988)
In Re Viking Company, Inc.
389 F. Supp. 1230 (E.D. Tennessee, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
78 Tenn. 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bells-admr-v-lyle-tenn-1882.