ARKj NASH 1). GRIFFIN. 443 ■■■ • NASH v.: GRIFFIN. } • • : Opinion 'cieliverea Jnne 20, 10.27: QUIETING TITLE—SUFFICIENCY OF EvIDENcE.=Evidence• in a suit to quiet . title held to, sustain :a , chancellor's finding that a puted strip of land, was not , ,intended , to be embraced in a deed from . tile parties' common predecessor • in title and Subsequent • deeds in ` defendante • Chain of 'title. I• 2: GUARbIAN , AND' WARD—*ALIDITY OF SALE OF LAND: =A probate sale of land by a guardian of minor children of an intestate, whO had, Conveyed the land .before, her !death, vested no title ; in persons from whom defendants, in a suit to quiet title, received • quitclaim deeds: Appeal from Union Chancery Court,.First Division ; .1. Y: Steve4m,:Chabeellor ;, affirmed. ; •
444 NASH V. GRIFFIN. [174 Powell, Smead & Knox, Marsh, McKay & Marlin and E. W. McGough, for appellant. Mahony, Yocum & Saye, for appellee. ' HART, *C.. J. This is an appeal by L. M. Nash and Mrs: Jessie L. Nash to reverse a decree of the chancery cdurt quieting the title of P. A. Griffin as to them to a certain -parcel of land abutting on Mount Holly Street, in • the city of El Dorado,* UniOn County, Arkansas, approximately 150 feet in length north and south and approxithately 100 feet in width east and west, off of .the west side of the east half of the southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of section 29, township 17 south, range 15 west. . Both the plaintiffs and the defendants claim title from a common source. Hattie E. Robinson owned the land in controversy, and, on the 27th day of February, 1904, -she conveyed by deed to R. A. Hilton a large body of land in Union County, Arkansas, including the parcel of land in dispute. On the 8th day of December, 1904, R. A. Hilton conveyed certain lands in Union County, Arkansas, to J. M. Whatley. Among the lands described in the deed is the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter of the northeast quarter of said section 29. On the 11th day of January, 1906., J. M. Whatley and wife conveyed said land by the same description to M. G. Murphy, Jr. On the first . day of March, 1919, M.:G. Murphy„fr., conveyed said land to Jessie L. Nash. It is described in the deed as follows : "All that part of the southwest quarter of southwest quarter of northeast quarter, section 29, township 17 south, range 15 west, lying nOrth of the El Dorado and Mount Holly public road as now located, and being in the city of El Dorado, Union County, Arkansas, containing 10 acres more or less." The record shows that the parcel of land in controversy is now situated in the city of El Dorado and in the western part of the forty acres of land in section 29 referred to above. What was formerly known as the Lisbon Road and is now known as Mount Holly Street
ARK.] NASH V. GRIFFIN. 445 runs through the southwest corner•of said forty acres land. R. A. Hilton is noW dead, but, when he conveyed the land to Whatley, he pointed out the- boundary line to Whatley: • There was a fence rfmning north and south On the east Side of said parcel of land, and this old fel-lee was painted ' out as the east * boUndary• 'of the land described in the deed. Whatley took possessiOn of the land conveYed to him ' , and never clainied any land in the quarter section' above described east of the old fence. :When : Whatley sold:the land to Murphy, be conveyed it by the • same descriPtion as conveyed in the" deed from Hilton to- himself; He pointed out. to Murphy the old fence as the bOundary line on the east side of the strip of land,- and never claimed any part of. fhe quarter Section east' of •hat . old • •fence. None of these liarties claimed any of the'land s , outh of , the 'old Lisbon Road; or what is•Inown as Mount Holly Street; and 6ast of the old. fence. 'The' : strip .Of land contains -abotit eight and one-half acres,• and they-did not claim to oWn any more Of the. quarter seCtion 'than that part' of it 'north ' . of the old Lisbon' Road or Monnt Holly Street . and west of the old fence . running. nOrth and' sonth through 'the west part of 'said qUarter section. 'Possession of tbis eight And one-half acres' of land • under claim of oWnership was held by Whatley and Murphy from the 'time' of the purchase by •WhafleY from Hilton in December, 1004, -until the convoyanee by M. G: Murphy, Jr.; to JeSsie L. Nash in January, 1921. 'The cOntest over' the • strip'd land arose after Oil was discovered in that territory. .• .• Without reVieWing and . cornmentini • at length upon the evidence, ' we are satisfied from - the testimony • :of Whatley and Murphy, which is corroberated by that of other witneSSes; that it was tbe intention of Mrs. Hattie E. Robinson to convey to Dr. R. A. Hilton and Of Dr: Hilton to- convey to Whatley approximately eight and one-half acres of the land north of the old Lisbon Road or Mount Holly . Street and west of the old fence in the west part of the quarter section above referred to and described. • The evidence clearly shows that a mistake
446 NASH /1.‘ GRIFFIN. [174 was made in describing the strip of land, and we are of the opinion that the chancellor correctly held that only eight and one-half acres, as above indicated, were intended; to be embraced in the deed from Mrs. Hattie E. Robinson tO Dr Hilton, and that the same mistake which was made in her deed to Dr. Hilton was made in the subsequent deeds: . Mrs. Hattie E. Robinson died intestate, leaving her husband and several minor children. An attempt was Made by her htsband, as guardian for her mihor children; to sell said land at probate sale and in that way vest title in persons from whom Mrs:Jessie L. Nash and L. M. Nash have subsequently received quitclaim deeds. But little need be said on this branch of the case. Mrs. Hattie E. Robinson had already conveyed the land prior to her death. I Consequently there "was nothing. left to be ,con- 1 veyed by the:guardian's sale; and the probate sale by-the guardian.. of Mrs. Robinson's minof children could not avail appellants - anything. ' The decision of the 'case I depends ,almost entirely upon the facts, and we are of the opinion that it is established by clear and convincing testimony that it was -Only intended by Mrs. Hattie Robinson-to eonvey eight and one,thalf acres to Dr. Hilton, and this was that part Of. the quarter section north of the old Lisbon Road and west of the old fence above referred-. to: The mistake:was made in the original deed and:was continued in the, subsequent deeds, and, for that reason,-appellants only acquired title to the eight and one'- half acres. Conceding this to be true, the paper . title -to the land_ in :controversy is in P. A. Griffin, r and lie' was entitled to have his title quieted against Mrs. :Jessie L. Nash and L. M. Nash.. It follows that the decree of the chancellor was correct, and it will therefore be affirmed.
You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.