Christopher v. Mungen

Decision Date10 December 1913
PartiesCHRISHTOPHER et al. v. MUNGEN et al.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Appeal from Circuit Court, Duval County; Geo. Couper Gibbs, Judge.

Bill by Jane Mungen and another against John G. Christopher and others. From the decree, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

See also, 61 Fla. 513, 55 So. 273.

Additional Syllabus by Editorial Staff

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

Where a trustee of real estate takes no title that may descend to his heirs or to his administrator, a deed covering the land made by the administrator and heirs of the trustee conveys no title.

A grantee in a deed conveying no title will not be heard to complain that possible rights in the grantor therein have been invaded.

In a suit for partition, where the only valid claim of the defendants is through E., who has only the same rights in the property that the complainant J. has, both E. and J. being children of the deceased owner of the property by slave marriages, the defendants, as the successors in title to E cannot complain of an adjudication that E. had equal rights with J., when the defendants averred that neither E. nor J took as heirs of the father, nor are any vested rights of the defendants invaded by according to J. equal rights with them in the property, since the defendants have only the rights of E., and J. and E. take equal shares under the same statutes allowing them to inherit from their father.

One claiming title under a child of a slave marriage, as against another child of a slave marriage, cannot complain that this court at one time held that a certain statute did not confer inheritable blood upon such offspring and subsequently held that a later statute conferring such rights was retroactive except where vested rights were invaded, where the title of both must stand or fall together.

When the title of two daughters of a slave marriage depend entirely upon a statute and a decision of this court, the grantee of one of them will not be heard to complain that the same statute and decision may be void as interfering with rights vested under former decisions.

The testimony examined in this case and found to sustain the contention of the appellees that Jane Mungen was the child of a slave marriage and cohabitation, and that she had inheritable blood under chapter 4749, Acts 1899.

The testimony examined and found not to sustain the contention of the appellants that appellees are barred from sustaining this suit by the alleged laches of the appellees in bringing it.

COUNSEL H. H. Buckman and Bisbee & Bedell, all of Jacksonville, for appellants.

N. P. Bryan, J. T. G. Crawford, Baker & Baker, Van C. Swearingen, and Axtell & Rinehart, all of Jacksonville, for appellees.

OPINION

HOCKER J.

The interest of the Land Mortgage Bank of Florida and Bessie A. Martin were alleged in the bill to be subordinate to the rights of complainants, and a decree pro confesso was entered against them. Appellant Thompson filed a motion alleging he was not aggrieved by the final decree, and praying that it be confirmed as to him. The only questions, therefore, before us are those affecting the rights and interest of John G. Christopher, Julia A. Wilson, and H. A. Wilson, her husband, and the McLeans. An answer was filed by appellants, to which there was a replication, and, besides the documentary evidence filed, several hundred pages of testimony was taken. On final hearing the court entered the following final decree:

'This cause coming on to be heard, and it appearing to the court that decrees pro confesso have been duly entered against the Land Mortgage Bank of Florida, Limited, of England, a corporation under the laws of England, and Bessie A. Martin, two of the defendants, and that the defendatns John G. Christopher, Julia A. Wilson, H. A. Wilson, her husband, William A. McLean, William A. McLean, Jr., as administrator of the estate of William A. McLean, deceased, and William R. Thompson, have filed their answers to the bill of complaint herein, and the complainants have filed the replications thereto, and that the parties have taken evidence which has been duly reported to this court, and the court being fully advised in the premises, it is ordered, adjudged, and decreed as follows:
'(1) That the motion of the defendant John G. Christopher, Julia A. Wilson, and H. A. Wilson, her husband, for leave to file an amended answer, which said motion was presented at the time of the final hearing of this cause, be and the same is hereby denied.
'(2) That the objections of complainants to the evidence offered and filed before the special examiner by the defendants, numbered 1 to 25, both inclusive, and 27, 28, 29, and 31, be and the same are hereby sustained.
'(3) That the objection of complainants to the evidence offered and filed before the special examiner, by the defendants, numbered 30, be and the same is hereby overruled.
'(4) That the objections of the defendants to the evidence offered and filed before the special examiner by the complainants, appearing on page 1 of the testimony, be and the same are hereby overruled.
'(5) That the complainants are not entitled to any relief against the defendant William R. Thompson in this proceeding, and that the bill of complaint as to said William R. Thompson be and the same is hereby dismissed without prejudice.
'(6) That the decree pro confesso heretofore entered in this cause against the defendant Land Mortgage Bank of Florida, Limited, of England, a corporation under the laws of England, be and the same is hereby confirmed, and that the said Land Mortgage Bank of Florida, Limited, or England, is not seised of any right, title, or interest in or to the premises hereinafter described, or any part thereof.

'(7) That the decree pro confesso heretofore entered in this cause against the defendant Bessie A. Martin be and the same is hereby confirmed, and that the said Bessie A. Martin is not seised of any right, title, or interest in or to the premises hereinafter described, or any part thereof.

'(8) That as to the defendant William A. McLean the equities are with the complainants, and that the said William A. McLean is not seised of any right, title, or interest in or to the premises herinafter described, or any part thereof.

'(9) That as to the defendants John G. Christopher, Julia A. Wilson, and H. A. Wilson, her husband, the equities are with the complainant Jane Mungen; that the complainant Jane Mungen and the defendant John G. Christopher are each entitled to, and seised and possessed of, one-half of the following described lands, in fee simple; that is to say, all those certain lots, pieces, or parcels of land in Duval county, Fla., particularly described as follows: That part of lot or tract 3 of East Lewisville, according to the map hereinafter referred to, commencing at the southwest corner thereof and running thence north, on the line dividing said tract from blocks 4, 5, and 39, 385 feet to a stake; thence south 88 degrees 15 minutes east, parallel to the south line of said tract 3, 1,350 feet, more or less, to Talleyrand avenue, said avenue being 60 feet wide; thence southerly along the west side of Talleyrand avenue to the southeast corner of said tract 3; thence westerly along the south line of said tract 3 to the point of beginning. Also lots 1 and 2 in block 9, lots 1 and 2 in block 10, lots 1, 3, and 4 in block 13, lots 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 in block 16, lots 3 and 4 in block 18, lots 1 and 2 in block 19, lots 2, 3, 4, and 5 in block 21, lots 3 and 4 in block 22, the north half of lot 1 and lots 2, 3, and 4 in block 25, lots 1 and 2 in block 26, lots 1 and 2 in block 27, lots 1, 3, and 4 in block 28, and west fraction of lot 4 in block 29, lots 1, 2 and 3 in block 30, lots 1 and 4 in block 31, and all of block 39, of East Lewisville, according to map thereof recorded in plat book 1, page 25, of the Public Records of Duval county, Fla.

'If is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the complainant Jane Mungen and the defendant Julia A. Wilson, wife of H. A. Wilson, are each entitled to and seised and possessed of one-half of the following described lands in fee simple; that is to say, all those certain lots, pieces, or parcels of land in Duval county, Fla., particularly described as follows: All of lot or tract 3 not hereinabove particularly described, and also lots 1 and 2 in block 33, lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 in block 34, lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 in block 35, lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 in block 37, lots 1 and 2 in block 38, of East Lewisville, according to map thereof recorded in plat book 1, page 25, of said Public Records in Duval county, Fla.

'And it is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that the complainant Jane Mungen and the defendants John G. Christopher and Julia A. Wilson, wife of H. A. Wilson, are entitled to and seised and possessed of the following described lands, in fee simple, in the proportions of one-half, three-eighths, and one-eighth, respectively; that is to say, all those certain lots, pieces, or parcels of land in Duval county, Fla., particularly described as follows: All that part of the certain subdivision of said county known as East Lewisville, situate in the northeastern part of the city of Jacksonville, Duval county, Fla., lying and being east of the Shell road or Talleyrand avenue, according to a map recorded in plat book 1, page 25, of the Public Records of said Duval county, Fla.; and also all of lot 4, block 29, not hereinabove described, lots 1, 2, 3, and 4 of block 23, and the east 126 feet of block 24, of said subdivision, according to said map.

'It is further ordered, adjudged, and decreed that a division and partition of said premises be made; that W. R. Sebring, A. W Palmer, and A. C. Ulmer be...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Wilder v. Punta Gorda State Bank
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • August 2, 1930
    ... ... consideration. Florida East Coast R. Co. v. Geiger, ... 66 Fla. 582, 64 So. 238; Christopher v. Mungen, 66 ... Fla. 467, 63 So. 923; First Nat. Bank v. Ulmer, 66 ... Fla. 68, 63 So. 145; A. R. Harper Piano Co. v. Seaboard ... Air Line Ry., ... ...
  • Burdine v. Sewell
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • July 27, 1926
    ... ... merits. See First Nat. Bank v. Ulmer, 66 Fla. 68, 63 ... So. 145; Cooney Eckstein Co. v. King, 69 Fla. 246, ... 67 So. 918; Christopher v. Mungen, 66 Fla. 467, 478, ... 63 So. 923; Fairlie v. Scott, 88 Fla. 229, 102 So ... ELLIS, ... J., ... ...
  • Payne v. Payne
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • August 13, 1921
    ... ... forbidden by law should be liberally construed to carry out ... the beneficent public policy of the state. Christopher v ... Mungen, 61 Fla. 513, 55 So. 273; Christopher v ... Mungen, 66 Fla. 467, 63 So. 923; Christopher v ... Mungen, 71 Fla. 545, 71 So. 625 ... ...
  • Christopher v. Mungen
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • April 18, 1916
    ...the demurrer was affirmed, and in the second the decree was affirmed. Christopher v. Mungen, 61 Fla. 513, 55 So. 273; Christopher v. Mungen, 66 Fla. 467, 63 So. 923. report as made by the commissioners appointed to make partition of the lands described in the bill shows that as to the lands......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT