Bain v. Tye
Decision Date | 21 October 1914 |
Parties | BAIN ET AL. v. TYE ET AL. |
Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Knox County.
Action by George W. Tye and others against Speed Bain and others. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.
J. D Tuggle and B. B. Golden, both of Barbourville, for appellants.
Dishman Tinsley & Dishman and J. M. Robsion, all of Barbourville, for appellees.
On May 29, 1855, Moses F. Ingram surveyed and procured a patent for 50 acres of land situated on the Oatfield branch of the waters of Greasy creek, in Knox county. The boundary of said land may be read in the opinion in Sprouls v. Hayes, 143 Ky. 532, 136 S.W. 1199, where this tract formerly was in litigation. Moses F. Ingram also acquired other tracts of land in the immediate neighborhood, including a tract of 50 acres surveyed August 16, 1866, and a third tract of 100 acres, surveyed December 15, 1870. Early in January, 1877 Moses F. Ingram having determined to move to Texas, he "sold out" his lands in Kentucky to Powell Centers and William H. Ingram for $300 in cash. Moses F. Ingram made a deed to Centers and William H. Ingram on January 27, 1877, carrying out the sale, whereby he conveyed to his grantees "about three hundred acres, be the same more or less," and bounded as follows:
This deed was duly recorded on November 26, 1877. By subsequent conveyances the land embraced in the 50-acre survey of May 29, 1855, was conveyed to the appellees Tye, Hays, and Dishman, and by them to the appellee the Greasy Brush Coal Company, the present owner. Moses F. Ingram carried out his intention of leaving Kentucky, and went to Texas in 1877. The proof shows his intention was to live there permanently; but, on account of the ill health of some of his family, he returned to Kentucky in 1878, and settled in the immediate neighborhood from which he had removed the year before. He lived there, always as a renter, and without making any claim whatever to any of the land which he had formerly owned, until his death in 1889. His heirs at law, consisting of his children and grandchildren, also lived in the neighborhood, and none of them made any claim to this property until May, 1911, when they hurriedly built a "shanty" on the 50-acre survey of May 29, 1855, and moved into it, all in one day. Their purpose was to assert title to this survey and support their title by possession. On the next day the appellees, Tye and his joint owners, brought this action against the heirs of Moses F. Ingram, seeking to enjoin them from trespassing upon said land, or from claiming title thereto, and to quiet the plaintiffs' title. Upon the hearing the chancellor granted the relief sought, and from that judgment the defendants prosecute this appeal.
The sole question for determination is this: Is the Moses F. Ingram 50-acre survey of May 29, 1855, embraced in the land conveyed by the deed of January 27, 1877, from Moses F. Ingram to Powell Centers and William H. Ingram? If it is so embraced, the plaintiffs below, who are appellees here, are unquestionably the owners of the 50 acres, and the judgment of the chancellor is correct. On the other hand, if the 50-acre survey of May 29, 1855, was not embraced in the 300-acre tract, then the title to the 50-acre tract remained in Moses F. Ingram and descended to his heirs; and if that be true, the judgment of the chancellor is wrong and should be reversed.
Appellants rest their case upon the well-known legal proposition that in case of a conflict between the particular description and the general description in a deed, the particular and not the general description controls. It will be noticed that the particular description of the 300 acres sold by Moses F. Ingram to Powell Centers and William H. Ingram in 1877, and contained in the granting clause thereof, contains neither calls nor distances; they are confined to the natural objects for a boundary. The general description contained in the habendum clause expressly says the 300 acres contains, among other lands, the 50-acre survey in the name of Moses F. Ingram, bearing date the 29th day of May, 1855. It is apparent from the face of the deed that it was not drawn by an expert, and was in a large measure drawn from memory so far as the boundaries were concerned. This idea is borne out by the fact that in attempting to describe the 50-acre survey of August 16, 1866, the deed describes it as the 15th day of August, 1856.
It is an elementary rule in the interpretation of deeds that the intention of the parties should be effectuated, and in doing this a liberal construction is given to deeds inartificially and untechnically drawn. The intent must primarily be gathered from a fair consideration of the entire instrument and the language employed therein, and should be consistent with the terms of the deed, including its scope and subject-matter. Heingley v. Harris, 1 Ky. Law Rep. 55; Davis v. Hardin, 80 Ky. 672; Ferrill v. Cleveland, 6 Ky. Law Rep. 512.
Furthermore effect and meaning must be given...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Kentucky Coke Co. v. Keystone Gas Co.
...Hudson & Collins v. McGuire, supra; 18 C.J. 346, and authorities there cited; Wilson v. Marsee, 166 Ky. 487, 179 S.W. 410; Bain v. Tye, 160 Ky. 408, 169 S.W. 843; Kamer Bryant, 103 Ky. 723, 46 S.W. 14, 20 Ky.Law Rep. 340. It is urged by appellant that the suit in the District Court was impr......
-
Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co. v. Webb
... ... convey an estate for life, that the grantors were presumably ... not familiar with the distinction between words of ... inheritance and words of purchase, and the practical ... construction given to the deeds by the parties ( Bain v ... Tye, 160 Ky. 408, 169 S.W. 843), and until plaintiff ... raised the question in the instant suit after the death of ... Woolery G. Eversole, 35 years after his conveyances to Alfred ... and Thomas, 26 years after the conveyance from Baker and ... Combs to Trigg, trustee, and 23 years ... ...
-
Turpen v. Johnson
...This is all the law requires. Rucker v. Steelman, 73 Ind. 396; Sengfelder v. Hill, 21 Wash. 371, 58 P. 250.' See, also, Bain v. Tye, 160 Ky. 408, 169 S.W. 843; United States Coal & Coke Co. v. Cecil, 109 608, 155 S.E. 899. Proposition IV relates to appellants' contention that the trial cour......
-
Tennison v. Walker
...J. Ellis Walker, both of Rolla, for appellants. J. J. Crites and C. C. Bland, both of Rolla, for respondents, cited: Bain et al. v. Tye et al., 160 Ky. 408, 169 S. W. 843; Warne v. Sorge, 258 Mo. 162, 167 S. W. 967; Davis v. Hess, 103 Mo. 31, 15 S. W. 324; Reynolds v. Lawrence, 147 Ala. 216......