TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Havemeyer v. Dahn

John C. Havemeyer v. Marcus Dahn, Impleaded with Storz & Iler

Havemeyer v. Dahn, 67 N.W. 489 (Neb. 1896)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Nebraska Supreme Court · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 19, 1896
Docket
No. 6309
Judges
Irvine, Ragan, Ryan
Citations
67 N.W. 48948 Neb. 5361896 Neb. LEXIS 105
Headnotes
1. Homestead: Deed: Acknowledgment. A conveyance of real estate. sucIl real estate being the homestead of the grantors, is, unless acknowledged, absolutely void. 2. Acknowledgment: Disqualification oe Oeeiceb. An attorney, who is a notary public, is not disqualified from taking an acknowledgment of a mortgage made to his client, merely because he holds for collection the claim secured by such mortgage, it not appearing that the attorney had any beneficial interest in having the mortgage made, nor that the amount of his compensation in any manner depended upon such mortgage being made. Sorhaek v. Tyrrell, 48 Neb., 514, followed.
Summary
Appeal from tbe district court of Douglas 'county. Heard below before Irvine, J.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Ragan

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

Ragan, 0.

Jobn C. Havemeyer brought this suit in équity in the district court of Douglas county against Marcus Dahn and Barbara Dahn, his wife, to foreclose a real estate mortgage. A corporation known as the O. F. Davis Company and a copartnership known as Storz & Iler were also made defendants to the action. The latter two filed cross-petitions, by which they also sought to foreclose mortgages held by them upon the real estate of Dahn. By the decree of the district court Havemeyer and the O. F. Davis Company were given liens upon the real estate as prayed for in their petition and cross-petition; but the district court denied the prayer of the cross-petition of Storz & Iler and dismissed the same and from this decree they have appealed.

*537 It appears from tbe special findings of tbe district court that one Kopald was indebted to Storz & Her, and as an evidence of tbis indebtedness be executed to them bis note and tbis note was signed by tbe appellee, Marcus Dabn, and a note secured by a mortgage upon tbe homestead of Dabn and wife to Storz & Iler. Tbe notary public wbo took the acknowledgment of tbis mortgage was an attorney at law, and tbe attorney and agent of Storz & Iler for tbe purpose of collecting tbe debt owing to them from Kopald, and procured Dabn and bis wife, as they alleged, by fraud and false representations, to execute tbe mortgage. Tbe learned district court was of opinion that because tbe notary public wbo took tbis acknowledgment was tbe agent and attorney of tbe mortgagee, be was therefore disqualified to take tbe acknowledgment, and tbe mortgage being upon a homestead was void. In Horbach v. Tyrrell, 48 Neb., 514 , banded down at tbis sitting of tbe court, we decided that a notary public was not disqualified from taking an acknowledgment of a mortgage made to a corporation of which be was secretary and treasurer, it not appearing that be was a stockholder in such corporation or otherwise beneficially interested in having tbe conveyance made. In tbe case at bar it is not found that tbe notary and attorney wbo took the acknowledgment of Dabn and bis wife bad any beneficial interest in having tbe mortgage made. It is true that be was agent and attorney for Storz & Her, but it does not appear that tbe amount of bis compensation in any manner depended upon bis procuring tbis mortgage or collecting tbe debt which it represented. Following Horbach v. Tyrrell, tbe decree appealed from is reversed and tbe cause remanded to tbe district court for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.

Irvine, C., not sitting. Ryan, C., dissents.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1897: 11904: 31905: 11906: 11909: 11912: 11920: 11929: 11933: 11954: 118972026peak 1904 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Johnson v. Casper270 P.2d 1012 (Idaho 1954)
  2. Knudsen v. Lythman200 P. 130 (Idaho 1920)
  3. La Fromboise v. Porter246 N.W. 193 (Mich. 1933)
  4. Hamling v. Ætna Life Ins.34 F.2d 112 (8th Cir. 1929)
  5. Meisner v. Hill138 N.W. 583 (Neb. 1912) · Concurrence
  6. Solt v. Anderson99 N.W. 678 (Neb. 1904)

Most recent

  1. Johnson v. Casper270 P.2d 1012 (Idaho 1954)
  2. La Fromboise v. Porter246 N.W. 193 (Mich. 1933)
  3. Hamling v. Ætna Life Ins.34 F.2d 112 (8th Cir. 1929)
  4. Knudsen v. Lythman200 P. 130 (Idaho 1920)
  5. Meisner v. Hill138 N.W. 583 (Neb. 1912) · Concurrence
  6. Kimmerly v. McMichael120 N.W. 487 (Neb. 1909)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Horbach v. Tyrrell, 37 L.R.A. 434 (Neb. 1896) 36

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list