City of Oneonta v. Sawyer, 6 Div. 102.

Decision Date18 February 1943
Docket Number6 Div. 102.
PartiesCITY OF ONEONTA v. SAWYER.
CourtAlabama Supreme Court

P A. Nash, of Oneonta, for appellant.

R G. Kelton, of Oneonta, for appellee.

BOULDIN, Justice.

The City of Oneonta filed a bill for the reformation of a deed executed by the City to appellee, R. L. Sawyer. The trial court, on submission for final decree on pleadings and proof denied relief and dismissed the bill.

Code of 1940, Title 47, § 136, reads: "When, through fraud, or a mutual mistake of the parties, or a mistake of one party which the other at the time knew or suspected, a deed mortgage, or other conveyance does not truly express the intention of the parties, it may be revised by a court of equity on the application of the party aggrieved so as to express that intention, insofar as this can be done without prejudice to rights acquired by third persons in good faith and for value."

Another statute deals in like terms with the reformation of written contracts. Title 9, § 59.

These statutes enact into statutory law, in general terms, the law of reformation of instruments long existent. One principle, embodied in these general terms, and particularly applicable to the case before us, is thus stated: "* * * where 'through mistake a written agreement contains substantially more or less than the parties to it intended, or, from ignorance or want of skill in the draftsman, the object and intention as contemplated by the agreement is not expressed in the written instrument by reason of the use of inapt expressions, equity will interpose and reform the agreement.' Trapp v. Moore, 21 Ala. 693, 697; Larkins v. Biddle, 21 Ala. 252; Hemphill v. Moody, 64 Ala. 468; Moore v. Tate, 114 Ala. 582, 21 So. 820; Orr v. Echols, 119 Ala. [340], 345, 24 So. 357; Skidmore v. Stewart, 199 Ala. 566, 75 So. 1; Parra v. Cooper, 213 Ala. 340, 104 So. 827; Ohlander v. Dexter, 97 Ala. 476, 12 So. 51." West End Savings Bank v. Goodwin, 223 Ala. 185, 187, 188, 135 So. 161, 162.

The reformation here sought is in matter of description of the lot or parcel of land. The grantee paid for and was put into possession of the lot admittedly intended. The grantee, over objections of the grantor, extended his possession to other adjoining lands claimed by him to have been purchased, and claimed to be covered by his deed. In such case, reformation may be had on proper averment and proof even though the deed be so defective in matter of description as to be void and inadmissible in a court of law. Greene v. Dickson, 119 Ala. 346, 24 So. 422, 72 Am.St.Rep. 920.

The land actually sold by mutual agreement of parties, as contended by complainant, is described in the bill as amended as follows: "A certain plot or lot of land located on the Southwest side of the New State Highway and East of First Avenue, in the City of Oneonta, Alabama, bounded as follows: On the Northwest side by Mrs. R. A. Ingram property; on the Northeast side by the New State Highway, (From Huntsville to Montgomery, Alabama); On the Southeast side by the property of the Blount County High School and the ditch that runs along the South side of Gordon's Warehouse property; and on the West by Gordon's Warehouse property, all lying and being in Section 31, Township 12, Range 2 East, in the City of Oneonta, Blount County, Alabama."

This description, as disclosed by undisputed evidence, covers a small lot in the form of an irregular quadrangle. No one took the pains to take the measurements of this lot, but by estimate it fronts eastward or southeastward on the State highway some 125 feet, and runs back westward, on the north side of the drain ditch some 140 feet, narrowing to some 60 feet at west end, adjoining the Gordon Warehouse property. The deed sought to be reformed, prepared by the city clerk and executed by the mayor, contains the following description:

"A certain plot or lot of land located on the Southwest side of the New State Highway and East of First Avenue, in the City of Oneonta, Alabama, bounded as follows: On the Northwest side by Mrs. R. A. Ingram property; on the Northeast side by the New State Highway (from Huntsville to Montgomery, Alabama); on the Southwest side by property of the Oneonta Cotton Warehouse Company, and on the Southeast side by property of the Blount County High School and the above mentioned highway. No guarantee is given or guaranteed herein as to the exact size of dimensions of this lot; but all of the property of said City, contained in the above described boundaries is hereby conveyed. All lying and being in Section 31, Township 12, Range 2 East, in the City of Oneonta, Alabama."

On receipt of this deed respondent claimed title to, caused to be surveyed, and enclosed not only the lot north of the ditch, but adjoining lands of the city running southward or southwestward, lying between the highway on the east and the county high school property on the west. The survey included part of the high school stadium. Respondent promptly tendered a deed to the State conveying the portion within the stadium grounds.

Again the parties have not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
11 cases
  • Pullum v. Pullum
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 24 Septiembre 2010
    ...instrument by reason of the use of inapt expressions, equity will interpose and reform the agreement.” ’ ” City of Oneonta v. Sawyer, 244 Ala. 25, 26, 12 So.2d 82, 83 (1943) (quoting West End Savings Bank v. Goodwin, 223 Ala. 185, 187, 135 So. 161, 162 (1931)). 3. “ ‘An unconscionable ... c......
  • Jim Walter Homes, Inc. v. Phifer
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 27 Mayo 1983
    ...reformation. Fidelity Service Ins. Co. v. A.B. Legg & Sons Burial Ins. Co., 274 Ala. 94, 145 So.2d 811 (1962); City of Oneonta v. Sawyer, 244 Ala. 25, 12 So.2d 82 (1943). In this case, however, the discrepancies in the acreages of the two deeds and mortgages (one for ten acres and the other......
  • Clipper v. Gordon
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 19 Enero 1950
    ...So. 214; Waller v. Mastin et al., 220 Ala. 479, 125 So. 806; Ballentine v. Bradley et al., 238 Ala. 446, 191 So. 618; City of Oneonta v. Sawyer, 244 Ala. 25, 12 So.2d 82. Where the bill avers, as does this bill, that the parties had agreed upon the sale of a specific piece of property, and ......
  • Fidelity Service Ins. Co. v. A. B. Legg & Sons Burial Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Alabama Supreme Court
    • 18 Octubre 1962
    ...the provisions of Section 59, Title 9, and Section 136, Title 47, Code of Alabama, 1940. As stated by Bouldin, J., in City of Oneonta v. Sawyer, 244 Ala. 25, 12 So.2d 82: 'These statutes enact into statutory law, in general terms, the law of reformation of instruments long existent. One pri......
  • 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