Manar v. Smith

109 So. 2d 652, 236 Miss. 192, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 308
CourtMississippi Supreme Court
DecidedMarch 16, 1959
DocketNo. 41049
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 109 So. 2d 652 (Manar v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Mississippi Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Manar v. Smith, 109 So. 2d 652, 236 Miss. 192, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 308 (Mich. 1959).

Opinion

Roberds, P. J.

This proceeding involves the determination of the title to one hundred and twenty acres of land located in Smith County, Mississippi. Appellants are the heirs-at-law of Miss B. E. Manar, Deceased, and persons who claim an interest in the land under said heirs. These heirs and persons claiming under them filed a hill in this cause May 23, 1957, asserting that they are the owners of said land. Appellees were the defendants to that hill. They denied that appellants had any interest in the land. They averred that they are the owners of the land. The chancellor held (1) that the appellees had title to the land under a foreclosure sale of a deed of trust executed by Miss Bertie E. Manar, and other subsequent conveyances of the land; and (2) by virtue of actual possession and claim of ownership under the ten-year Statute of Limitations (Section 711, Miss. Code of 1942); and (3) that the appellants were estopped by laches to maintain their suit. The chancellor dismissed the hill, from which action this appeal was taken. We need not pass upon all of the stated contentions. If either holding of the chancellor’s is sustained, his action [196]*196in dismissing the bill -will be affirmed. His action should be affirmed if there is substantial evidence to support his conclusions. Aside from the other contentions, we are clearly of the opinion that the chancellor was correct in his holding that appellees have title to the land under the ten-year’s adverse possession statute.

Said Section 711 is as follows: “Ten years’ actual adverse possession by any person claiming to be the owner for that time of any land, uninterruptedly continued for ten years by occupancy, descent, conveyance, or otherwise, in whatever way such occupancy may have commenced or continued, shall vest in every actual occupant or possessor of such land a full and complete title, saving to persons under the disability of minority or unsoundness of mind the right to sue within ten years after the removal of such disability, as provided in the first section of this chapter; but the saving in favor of persons under disability of unsoundness of mind shall never extend longer than thirty-one years.”

It may be conducive to clarity to set out in chronoligical order the various acts by appellees bearing upon the acquisition of title by adverse possession under the foregoing statute.

Miss Bertie E. Manar acquired title to forty acres of the land by a deed from T. S. Manar and Mrs. C. A. Manar, dated March 5, 1915, and that deed contains a reservation as to timber, to which we shall refer later. Miss B. E. Manar acquired title to the remaining eighty acres of the land by a deed dated September 27, 1915, executed by T. S. Manar and Mrs. C. A. Manar.

On October 23, 1915, Miss Manar executed a deed of trust on the land to H. T. Jolly, Trustee, the beneficiary being Rosenthal-Sloan Millinery Company. This deed of trust secured a promissory note of the grantors in the sum of $1,765.13, and was due October 22, 1918. Miss Manar departed this life intestate September 21, 1923. On December 29,1923, said deed of trust was fore[197]*197closed and the land was purchased by D. A. Wilkerson. The legality of that foreclosure is attacked by appellant because of the substitution of the trustee therein by an officer of the beneficiary corporation and not by the corporation itself. As above-stated, the chancellor held the foreclosure sale to be valid. We do not pass upon that question. We cite such foreclosure as bearing upon title by adverse possession.

In 1926 Homer Currie purchased the land at a tax sale for nonpayment of the state and county taxes. He recorded the deed he received two years later. That deed, by its .wording, conveyed an absolute title to the property.

Currie had the land surveyed, the lines blazed, the corners established, and had the quantity of timber thereon estimated. He borrowed money on the land and executed a deed of trust to a bank to secure the loan. The deed of trust was recorded.

In 1927 Currie was adjudged by the Chancery Court of Smith County to be the owner of the land under the said tax sale, subject to certain timber rights of Ham Lumber Company and Eastman, Gardner Lumber Company, who had purchased certain timber from Currie.

In 1928 Currie cut from the land posts and firewood for himself and for others.

In 1929 he cut and removed timber from the land and sold logs to other persons in commercial quantities. He also cut posts and firewood from the land.

In 1930 he cut and sold other logs from the land, and he executed an oil and gas lease thereon, which was duly recorded.

In 1931 he again cut and sold from the land timber in commercial quantities. He cut posts and firewood therefrom. He did this also in the year 1932, and for a number of years to and including 1936.

In 1937 he conveyed the land by deed to Luther Currie. Luther Currie borrowed money on the land and executed [198]*198a deed of trust to H. D. Miller thereon. Both the deed and trust deed were duly recorded.

In 1939 Luther Currie executed an oil and gas lease on the property. During that year he reconveyed the land to Homer Currie.

In 1941 Homer Currie listed forty acres of this land as constituting a part of his homestead.

In 1942 Homer Currie executed a timber deed to Homer Tullos. The deed was recorded and Tullos erected a sawmill on the land and cut timber therefrom. Homer Currie borrowed $875 from the Bank of Raleigh and executed a deed of trust on the land to secure payment thereof.

Again in 1943 Homer Currie executed a timber deed to Tullos, who cut timber from the land during that year. Homer Currie also executed an oil and gas lease on the property to H. R. Smith, who assigned the lease to the Magnolia Petroleum Company. Tullos conveyed some of the timber to Wilkerson. Wilkerson executed to the Bank of Raleigh a deed of trust on the timber he had purchased.

In 1944 Currie conveyed the land to Lon Y. Smith, subject to existing mineral rights.

February 23, 1945, Wilkerson conveyed the land by quitclaim to Homer Currie. In 1945 Lon Y. Smith executed a number of mineral conveyances.

In 1950 Currie was paid rentals under the oil and gas leases.

In 1952 and 1953 Clark, under contract from Currie, cut and removed certain timber on the premises. In 1953 Currie executed another deed of trust on the land to the Bank of Raleigh.

In 1954 Clark reconveyed to Currie the uncut timber.

In 1955 Currie executed an oil and gas lease to Quisenberry, which was assigned to the California Company. The rental was paid to Currie.

[199]*199In 1956 Cnrrie executed a mineral deed to Bralver. In 1956 Currie executed a deed to Gr. W. Luckey, reserving the minerals. Currie also executed a mineral deed to Pittman; and Luckey executed a trust deed to the Smith County Bank.

There are other conveyances we deem unnecessary to set out.

All of the afore-mentioned conveyances were duly placed of record.

We have said nothing of the payment of taxes because that question was covered by an agreement between the attorneys. That agreement stipulates that Homer Currie paid all of the ad valorem taxes for the years 1926 and 1927 and “all successive years thereafter through 1955.”

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

Related

Roy v. Kayser
501 So. 2d 1110 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
109 So. 2d 652, 236 Miss. 192, 1959 Miss. LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manar-v-smith-miss-1959.