Galliano v. Lane

New York Court of Chancery

Galliano v. Lane

2 Sand. Ch. 147, 1844 N.Y. LEXIS 483, 1844 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 84

DecidedOctober 7, 1844

StatusPublished

This text of 2 Sand. Ch. 147 (Galliano v. Lane) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New York Court of Chancery primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Galliano v. Lane, 2 Sand. Ch. 147, 1844 N.Y. LEXIS 483, 1844 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 84 (N.Y. 1844).

Pincite

Opinion

The Assistant Vice-Chancellor,

said the proof was clear that the deed was executed while the complainant was a married woman, and not being acknowledged by her in the manner prescribed by law, was entirely invalid. It was equally objectionable, because her husband was not a party to it, or conveying concurrently with her. But in consequence of its being ante-dated, and thus appearing to be a deed executed by her before her marriage, it has the semblance of a perfect conveyance, which she is entitled in this court to have set aside, and her title cleared of the cloud thus thrown over it.

A decree was made, declaring the deed to be void and of no effect, and directing a re-conveyance by John and Louisa Lane. The guardian ad litem of the latter was directed to execute the deed for her and in her name.

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

The Assistant Vice-Chancellor,

said the proof was clear that the deed was executed while the complainant was a married woman, and not being acknowledged by her in the manner prescribed by law, was entirely invalid. It was equally objectionable, because her husband was not a party to it, or conveying concurrently with her. But in consequence of its being ante-dated, and thus appearing to be a deed executed by her before her marriage, it has the semblance of a perfect conveyance, which she is entitled in this court to have set aside, and her title cleared of the cloud thus thrown over it.

A decree was made, declaring the deed to be void and of no effect, and directing a re-conveyance by John and Louisa Lane. The guardian ad litem of the latter was directed to execute the deed for her and in her name.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2 Sand. Ch. 147, 1844 N.Y. LEXIS 483, 1844 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 84, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galliano-v-lane-nychanct-1844.