Acknowledgment: Under a Statute Regulating Acknowledgments by Married Women: An Examination Made over Telephone Is Not Sufficient

1921 Michigan law review  
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the mid--seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries. We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non--commercial purposes. Read more about Early Journal
more » ... out Early Journal Content at JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not--for--profit organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please contact RECENT IMPORTANT DECISIONS ACKNOWLEDGMENT.-UNDER A STATUTE REGULATING ACKNOWLEDGMENTS BY MARRIED WOMEN-AN EXAMINATION MADE OVER TELEPHONE IS NOT SUrFI-CIENT.-In a question involving the validity of a mortgage deed, it appeared that the acknowledgment of a Mrs. Bertholf had been taken by meansl of telephone. The court, in construing the Idaho statute regulating acknowledgments of married women, held that the clear intent of the statute was that all acknowledgments should be takenl in person before the magistrate, and any attempted acknowledgment not taken in person, though correct in form and without suspicion of fraud, was void, being beyond the power of the officer. Myers v. Eby (Idaho, I920), I93 Pac. 77. That so common a method of taking acknowledgments should be found void is perhaps startling, yet seems in entire accord with the great weight of authority. Privy examinations of married women taken by telephone have generally been held invalid. Roach v. Francisco, 138 Tenn. 357, I97 S. W. Io99, refuses to allow such a practice upon the general basis that their statute had not been passed at the time of the inauguration of telephones, and acknowledgments by such means could not have been within the purview of the legislature? Wester v. Hurt, Tenn. -, I30 S. W. 1099, decides against such a practice on the ground that judicial determination has decided that such examinations must be personal. The chief authority for a different view is Banning v. Banning, 80 Cal. 271, 13 Am. St. Rep. I56, where the court states the unmistakable view that an acknowledgment made by tele-
doi:10.2307/1276898 fatcat:lngfioqicvbxzjfwnjxlciqnfy