Hennefer v. Hays

• Court: Utah Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: ZANE, C. J.:
• Citation: Hennefer v. Hays, 14 Utah 324, 47 P. 90 (Utah 1896)
• Decision Date: 10 December 1896
• Docket Number: 670
• Parties: A. H. HENNEFER, REBECCA A. BUNCE, JAMES McLAUGHLIN, AND CELIA M. CAMPBELL, RESPONDENTS, v. JENNIE E. HAYS, APPELLANT

47 P. 90

14 Utah 324

A. H. HENNEFER, REBECCA A. BUNCE, JAMES McLAUGHLIN, AND CELIA M. CAMPBELL, RESPONDENTS, v. JENNIE E. HAYS, APPELLANT

No. 670

Supreme Court of Utah

December 10, 1896

Appeal from the Third district court, Territory of Utah. Hon. S. A Merritt, Judge.

Action by A. H. Hennefer, Rebecca A. Bunce, James McLaughlin, and Celia M. Campbell against Jennie Hays. The actions were tried together. From a decree for plaintiffs, defendant appeals.

Reversed.

S. P Armstrong, for appellant.

Loofbourow & Kahn, S.W. Darke, and James M. Denny, for respondents.

No briefs were filed.

ZANE C. J. BARTCH and MINER, JJ., concur.

OPINION

ZANE, C. J.:

These four cases were tried before a referee. The parties stipulated before trial that they should be heard together and that the evidence taken should be received in each, so far as competent, relevant, and material, and that the findings of fact and conclusions of law should be made a part of the record in each case. It appears from the record that the late Abraham Hays was, in the year 1886, the owner of a part of lot 2 in block 6, plat B of Salt Lake City survey, more accurately described in the record; that he died on the 14th day of December of that year; and that his wife, Sarah Hays, and five grandchildren, namely, A. H. Hennefer, William H. Hennefer, Rebecca A. Bunce, and Edward E. Hennefer, children of a deceased daughter, and Jennie E. Hays, defendant, daughter of a deceased son, survived him; and that the plaintiffs McLaughlin and Campbell obtained interests in the land from William H. Hennefer and Mrs. Bunce. The plaintiffs A. H. Hennefer and Rebecca A. Bunce allege in their complaints an unwritten, executory contract, between Abraham Hays and the four grandchildren first above named, and possession under the contract, and valuable improvements and performance on their part, and they pray the court to grant them specific performance; while the plaintiffs McLaughlin and Campbell base their cause of action on the statute of limitations simply, acquired, as alleged, by adverse possession and payment of taxes for seven years, and they asked the court to quiet their titles. The referee found the existence of the verbal contract between Abraham Hays and the four grandchildren first named, and possession under and performance of it on their part. As to the allegations in the complaint of McLaughlin and Campbell, of possession and payment of taxes for seven years before action was brought, the referee found adverse possession for about three years and six months, and made no finding as to the payment of taxes. But he states, as a conclusion of law, that each of the plaintiffs is entitled to a decree quieting his title. So it appears that the referee found the existence of the facts set up to show a right to specific performance in the complaints of Hennefer and Bunce, but did not find adverse possession and payment of taxes, alleged in the complaints of McLaughlin and Campbell, to show their right to have their titles quieted. The referee found the facts, stated in the two first complaints, but stated, as a conclusion of law, that all the plaintiffs were...