Barr v. Stone

• Decision Date: 08 June 1922
• Docket Number: No. 22697.,22697.
• Citation: 242 S.W. 661
• Parties: BARR v. STONE et al.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

242 S.W. 661

BARR v. STONE et al.

No. 22697.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2.

June 8, 1922.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Platte County; Alonzo D. Burns, Judge.

Action by E. M. Barr against L. W. Stone and others. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant John I. Locke appeals. Affirmed.

On August 9, 1915, plaintiff filed a petition in the circuit court of Platte county, Mo., to quiet title to the land therein described, located in said county. On November 25, 1918, he filed an amended petition, alleging that he was the owner of the real estate described therein; that appellant, John I. Locke, and the other defendants, claim some interest in above land, etc. Said amended petition asked the court to ascertain and determine the titles and Interests of plaintiff and defendants in and to said real estate, and also asked for general relief.

Defendant John I. Locke, the sole appellant herein, filed an answer to said amended petition, containing a general denial of the matters contained in said petition. Said answer likewise alleged that appellant was the owner in fee simple of about 57 acres of land located in Platte county, Mo., and which is described in said answer. It is averred therein that plaintiff has no interest in said land, although he claims to have an interest therein. The court, in said answer, was asked to quiet and determine the title to the real estate described therein.

Plaintiff filed a general denial of the new matter pleaded in said answer.

Defendants James T. Duncan, Trustee, and Armourdale State Bank of Commerce each filed a general denial, putting in issue the allegations of said amended petition.

The case was submitted to the court without a jury and, on September 20, 1920, after hearing the evidence, the court found the issues in favor of respondent as to the land described in said amended petition, which said land is described in the decree rendered herein. The court likewise found the issues in favor of appellant as to the land described in said answer, which is also set out in said decree. The latter, in respect to above matters, reads as follows:

"1. That the plaintiff, E. M. Barr, is the ownor in fee simple and in possession of the following described lands situate, lying and being in Platte county, Mo.: Beginning on the west line of section 15, township 51, range 35, Platte county, Mo., and that line produced due south to the north bank of the Missouri river at a point one-half mile south of the northwest corner of said section; thence east and parallel with the north line of said section, one-fourth mile; thence south to the north bank of Missouri river, on a line produced one-fourth mile perpendicular distance east of and parallel to the west line aforesaid of said section 15, and that line produced due south to the north bank of the Missouri river; thence northwestwardly along the meanderings of the north bank of the Missouri river to an intersection with the aforesaid west line of said section 15, and that line produced due south to the north bank of the Missouri river; thence north along said last-named line to the beginning; all of which land is known as the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter and lot 5 of section 15 aforesaid, together with all accretions thereunto belonging or appertaining and which said land is also known as the west one-half and also as the west subdivision of the southwest fractional quarter of said section 15 aforesaid, together with all accretions thereunto belonging or appertaining. Excepting from all of the above-described land, the lands hereinafter described as belonging to the defendant John I. Locke, and that the defendants, and none of them, have any right, title, or interest, in or to the above-described lands, excepting the lands hereinafter described as belonging to said defendant John I. Locke, and said defendants and each of them are forever barred and precluded from setting up and asserting any right, title, or interest in or to said lands, excepting the lands hereinafter described as belonging to said defendant John I. Locke, adverse to said plaintiff.

"2. That the defendant John I. Locke is the owner in fee and entitled to and in the possession of the following described real estate, situate, lying and being in Platte county, Mo., to wit: Fifty-seven acres of land, more or less, situated in the northwest quarter of section 22, township 51, range 35, and described as follows: Beginning at the northwest corner of said section 22, township 51, range 35, and running thence south 24 chains, thence south 65 degrees east, 21.93 chains, thence north 33 chains, thence west 20 chains to point of beginning, together with all accretions thereto belonging or appertaining, and that neither the plaintiff nor any of the defendants, except the defendant James T. Duncan, trustee, and the defendant the Armourdale State Bank of Commerce have any right, title, or interest in or to said last above-described lands, or any part thereof, and that plaintiff and all of said defendants, except said James T. Duncan, trustee, and the Armourdale State Bank of Commerce, be and they are hereby forever barred and precluded from hereafter claiming or asserting any right, title, interest, or claim, in or to said last above-described land, or any part thereof, adverse to said John I. Locke, and those claiming by, through, or under him, which would in any way abridge, modify, restrain, or interfere with the free, full, and complete ownership, possession, and enjoyment of said last above-described real estate, by said John I. Locke, or those claiming by, through, or under him.

"3. That said James T. Duncan, trustee, is trustee in a deed of trust given by said John I. Locke and L. W. Stone, to James T. Duncan, trustee, for the Armourdale State Bank of Commerce, recorded in book 79 at page 94 of the records of Platte county, Mo.

"4. That the costs of this suit be taxed against the plaintiff herein, E. M. Barr, and that the defendants John I. Locke and James T. Duncan and Armourdale State Bank of Commerce, have and recover of and from said plaintiff, E. M. Barr, their costs in this behalf expended, and that execution issue therefor."

The plaintiff did not appeal from said decree.

Appellant Locke, in due time, filed motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment. Both motions were overruled, and the cause was duly appealed by him to this court. Such other matters as may be deemed important, will be considered in the opinion.

On April 12, 1922, counsel for respondent and appellant, filed herein a stipulation, which without caption and signatures, reads as follows:

"It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and between the parties to the above-entitled cause that original Exhibits 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 15, 16, and 17, being maps and plats and pieces of logs, introduced by respondent in evidence upon the trial of the above-entitled cause in the circuit court of Platte county, Mo., may be filed with the abstract of record and briefs in the above-entitled cause and used in the argument of said cause before the above-entitled court instead of reproducing and attaching same to abstract of records filed in said cause."

John D. Wendorff, of Kansas City, and James H. Hull, of Platte City, for appellant.

Guy B. Park, of Platte City, for respondent.

BAILEY, J. (after stating the facts as above).

1. This is an action at law, tried without a jury, and without instructions. If there was substantial evidence offered at the trial sustaining the decree as rendered, it is conclusive in this court, unless reversible error was committed during the progress of the trial in the admission or rejection of testimony. Black v. Howerton (Mo. Sup.) 237 S. W. 471, 472, 473; Martin v. Hays (Mo. Sup.) 228 S. W. loc. cit. 744; Crews v. Maupin, 285 Mo. 466, 226 S. W. loc. cit. 953; Union Trust Co. v. Hill, 283 Mo. 278, 223 S. W. 434; Mooneyham v. Mynett et al. (Mo. Sup.) 222 S. W. 451; Cowan v. Young, 282 Mo. 36, 220 S. W. loc. cit. 872; Hayes v. McLaughlin (Mo. Sup.) 217 S. W. loc. cit. 264, and cases cited; Franke v. Franke (Mo. Sup.) 213 S. W. 41; Bingham v. Edmonds et al. (Mo. Sup.) 210 S. W. 885; Roloson v. Riggs, 274 Mo. 522, 203 S. W. loc. cit. 975; Dowd v. Bond (Mo. Sup.) 199 S. W. 954; January v. Harrison (Mo. Sup.) 199 S. W. loc. cit. 937.

2. Plaintiff, in his amended petition, claimed to be the owner of the land described therein. He alleged that defendants claimed an interest in said land, and asked the court to ascertain and determine the title thereto as between the parties herein. Appellant, in his answer, denied that he claimed any interest in the land described in the amended petition, but asserted title to other real estate, alleged that plaintiff claimed an interest therein, and asked the court to determine the title to the land described In said answer. Under the pleadings, respondent was entitled to a judgment declaring him to be the owner of the real estate described in the amended petition, and a finding that appellant had no interest therein. Jordan v. Stevens, 55 Mo. 361, 362; Gilchrist v. Bryant, 213 Mo. loc. cit. 444, 111 S. W. 1128; Rohlf v. Hayes et al. (Mo. Sup.) 229 S. W. 747; McDaniel v. Leuer (Mo. Sup.) 230 S. W. 633; section 1970, R. S. 1919.

In Rohlf v. Hayes (Mo. Sup.) 229 S. W. 747, Judge Graves, in behalf of Division 1, in construing the law relating to this...