Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

3 Ohio St. (N.S.) 154

Moore v. Moore

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided February 9, 1854

Ohio Supreme Court · decided 1854-02-09

The action below was ejectment. The plaintiff in that action bav155] ing made a prima facie ease, the defendant offered *in evidence a deed from Eachel Moore, one of the lessors of the plaintiff, dated June 9, 1852.

Decided 1854-02-09

Corwin, C. J.

¶1The act done by a mayor or justice of the peace in taking the acknowledgment of a deed is the exercise of a power in the nature of that conferred upon a commissioner of deeds. In the act “ to provide for the proof, acknowledgment, and recording of deeds and other instruments of writing ” (Swan, old ed. 265), no territorial limit is fixed to the power of the officers invested with the power of taking acknowledgments. As to justices of the peace, however, another statute provides that the power “shall be coextensive with the county in which they may have been elected.” Ib. 506. If, as held in the case of Crumbaugh v. Kugler, 2 Ohio St., the taking of an acknowledgment without his county is a valid act, a fortiori, such an act must be valid when done by a mayor without the limits of his city; no territorial limitation whatever being expressed in the statute.

¶2For the error of the court in rejecting the deed offered in evidence, the judgment must be reversed.

/3/ohiost(ns)/154 · .json · Public domain