Recite

In a statute requiring that a sheriff’s deed recite the execution, names of the parties, etc., it was held that the word recite does not mean to copy or repeat verbatim, but only to state the substance of the execution. Armstrong’s Lessee v. Mc Coy, 8 Ohio 128, 31 Am. Dec. 435.

To set forth in writing facts explanatory of a transaction, — its nature, or the reasons for it. In pleading, " reciting a statute " is quoting or stating its contents. " Recital. The statement, in a deed or other instrument, of the reason for executing it, or of its relation to other instruments. Misreeital. An erroneous recital. Constitutes part of the premises of a deed. Usually begins with "whereas," and sets forth such other deeds, agreements, or matters of fact as are necessary to explain the reasons upon which the present transaction is founded. 3 Particular recitals in a deed may operate as an estoppel upon the parties thereto, and their privies; not so general recitals. But no recital can bind innocent third parties. A recital of purchase-money is always open to dispute.* It is laid down generally that a recital of one deed in another binds the parties, and those who claim under them. Technically speaking, it operates as an estoppel, and binds parties and privies,— privies in blood, privies in estate, and privies in law. But it does not bind mere strangers, or those who claim by title paramount to the deed; nor persons claiming by an adverse title or from the parties by title anterior to the date of the reciting deed. But there are cases in which such a recital may be used as evidence even against strangers. If, for instance, there be a recital of a lease in a deed of release, and in a suit agamst a stranger the title under the release comes in question, there the recital is not per se evidence of the existence of the lease. But if the existence and loss of the lease be established by other evidence, the recital is admissible as secondary proof, in the absence of more perfect evidence, to establish the contents of the lease; and if the transaction be ancient, and possession has long been held under such release, and is not otherwise to be accounted for, the recital will of itself materially fortify the presumption, from lapse of time Central Trust Co. v. Wabash, &c. R. Co., 32 F. E. 187 (1887). See generally Union Trust Co. v. Illinois Midland E. Co., 117 U. S. 434 (1866), Blatchford, J.; 23 Cent. Law J. 340 (1886), cases; 3 Law Quar. Eev. 429-45 (1887), cases; 100 U S. 153; 3 Woods, 316, 514, 527, 691; SDiU. 519, 476; 60 Ala. 331; 16 Wend. 421; 71 N. Y. 401; 12 E. I. 497; 11 Heisk. 210, 412. ' Stanton v. Alabama, &0. R. Co., 31 F. E. 585 (1837); Same v. Same, 2 Woods, 512 (1875), cases. 2 Gould, PI., 4 ed., p. 46, note; 6 W. Va. 648. ' [2 Bl. Com. 298. 1 Greenl. Ev. §§ 23, 26; 2 and length of possession, of the original existence of the lease. 1 Compare Inducement; Pbeauble. See Bond, Municipal; Codpon; Estoppel.

To state in a written instrument facts connected with its inception, or reasons for its being made. Recital: the formal statement or setting sons upon which the transaction is founded; the rehearsal or making mention in a deed or writing of something which has been done before. Recitals in conveyancing correspond in general nature with preambles in statutes, and with inducement in pleading. They are not essential parts of a contract or deed, and are not obligatory or operative in the same manner as the contracting or granting words. They are introduced at the option of parties to aid in construing and applying the operative parts of the instrument, should controversy arise, by preserving the knowledge of the facts and motives which led to the making the instrument. Thus they are, generally (unless connected with subsequent occurrences — such as a reliance upon them by a person to his prejudice — warranting application of the doctrine of estoppel), operative only by way of admission or evidence, and are open, in a proper case, to explanation and proof of mistake. The recital usually made in a deed acknowledging payment of the purchasemoney is a familiar instance of the limit placed upon the effect of recitals. The grantor is allowed to disprove it, if his purpose is to recover the money; and he may, while the grantee's situation remains unchanged, show that the recital is erroneous, and in fact the money was not paid, and may recover it. But he is not allowed to contradict the recital for the purpose of defeating the conveyance, or recovering back the land; nor would he be allowed to contradict the recital, to the prejudice of a third person to whom the grantee had exhibited it, and who on the faith of it had made advances or settled accounts. Recitals are usually introduced in the introductory parts of the instrument, and may be in any forms of language appropriate and lucid.