Laclede Land & Improvement Co. v. Schneider
| Decision Date | 25 May 1915 |
| Docket Number | No. 17079.,17079. |
| Citation | 177 S.W. 388 |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
| Parties | LACLEDE LAND & IMPROVEMENT CO. v. SCHNEIDER et al. |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Reynolds County; E. M. Dearing, Judge.
Action to quiet title by the Laclede Land & Improvement Company against George Schneider and others. From a judgment for defendant William H. Broyle, plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.
This action was instituted in October, 1910, against George Schneider and all other persons claiming under him as "remote, voluntary or involuntary grantees." Proper service was had by order of publication, and, upon the return day of such order, the defendant William H. Broyle filed answer asserting title in himself and joining plaintiff in a prayer that the title to the land sued for be determined and quieted. It was shown by the evidence that George Schneider was the patentee of the land in dispute, and that defendant Broyle claimed under said Schneider through a deed which he testified had been lost. The plaintiff claims under a sheriff's deed for delinquent taxes, which deed, for convenience, will be hereinafter designated simply as a "sheriff's deed." Plaintiff also claims under the 30-year statute of limitation. The sheriff's deed shows upon its face that neither Schneider, Broyle, nor any one else who had any interest in the lands in dispute were made defendants in the, judgment and proceedings upon which said sheriff's deed is predicated. The plaintiff, however, contends that, though its sheriff's deed be void, said deed is at least color of title to the land in dispute, and that, plaintiff having had lawful possession of a part of said land during a sufficient length of time to vest title under the 30-year statute of limitation, it now holds a fee-simple title to all of said lands, and that the decree should have been for plaintiff.
The lands embraced in the present action are lots 1 and 2 of the N. W. ¼, and lot 1 and the N. W. ½ of lot 2, S. W. ¼, section 19, township 32, range 1, west. The land that plaintiff has been in possession of is the S. ½ of lot 2, S. W. ¼ of the aforesaid section 19; so that this action does not embrace, nor purport to affect, the same land of which the plaintiff was in possession. It is, however, contended by plaintiff that defendant claims all of lots 1 and 2, N. W. ¼, and all of lots 1 and 2, S. W. ¼ of said section 19, and that plaintiff's sheriff's deed also covers all of the lots last described; therefore the plaintiff's possession of the S. ½ of lot 2, S. W. ¼ extended its possession to all the land claimed by defendant under the provisions of section 1882, R. S. 1909, and that such possession vested the title to all of said tract in plaintiff, under the 30-year statute of limitation. Section 1884, R. S. 1909.
The defendant Broyle has not paid any taxes on the land in dispute since the year 1871 (about 34 years before this action was begun), and therefore it becomes necessary, in ascertaining the effect to be given to plaintiff's possession of the one 40 claimed by defendant, to determine and construe the plaintiff's sheriff's deed. What land does that deed purport to convey? And to what land does it convey color of title? These issues, and such additional facts as may be necessary to a full understanding of the case, will be noted in connection with our conclusions.
J. B. Daniel, of Piedmont, for appellant. R. I. January, of Centerville, for respondents.
BROWN, J. (after stating the facts as above).
That the plaintiff's sheriff's deed, based, as it was, upon a suit and judgment in which no person was named as defendant who at any time ever held any interest in the land in dispute, was insufficient to pass title, is a proposition so plain as to scarcely justify citation for its support. Section 6837, R. S. 1879; and section 7682, R. S. 1880.
We next pass to the contention that plaintiff's sheriff's deed created color of title in plaintiff to the lands in dispute in this action. It is true that defendant Broyle claimed, not only the land sued for, but also the 40 acres which plaintiff had in possession. But the real issue is: What land did plaintiff's sheriff's deed purport to convey? As has been seen, it was void; but a void deed may constitute color of title, if it purports to convey the land in dispute. Said sheriff's deed recites that on November 27, 1886, the state of Missouri, suing at the relation and to the use of the collector of Reynolds county, obtained a judgment against James L. Lyman (and other persons who had no interest in the land in dispute) for the sum of $26.19, delinquent taxes of the year 1884, which judgment was declared and decreed to be a special lien upon the following described lands:
Tract Sec. Twp. Range
No
1 Lots 1, 2 & 3 of
S. W. 4; lots 1
2 & 3 of N. W. 4 18 32 1 W
2 Lots 1, 2 & 3 of N
W. 4; lots 1, 2
& 3 of S. W. 4
#2 19 " "
3 E. 2 of N. W. 4 20 " "
Said sheriff's deed also recited that: Special execution was issued on said tax judgment to the sheriff of Reynolds...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mississippi Valley Trust Company v. Begley
... ... Mo.App. 117; Melone v. Fidelity Co., 71 Mo.App. 8; ... Met. Land Co. v. Manning, 98 Mo.App. 267; Rice ... Brothers v. Bank, 98 Mo.App ... Co., 138 Mo. 591; Wilson v ... Beckwith, 140 Mo. 359; Laclede Land & Imp. Co. v ... Schneider, 177 S.W. 388; Daniels v. State, 18 ... ...
-
Abington v. Townsend
...had a right to rely, and did rely, upon this decision of this court as a rule of property. Lumber Co. v. Craig, 248 Mo. 331; Imp. Co. v. Schneider, 177 S.W. 388. Defendant attempts to defend this case upon the theory that he was a bona-fide purchaser of the land without notice, but the doct......
-
Pruitt v. St. Johns Levee & Drainage Dist.
... ... St. Johns Levee & Drainage District, Corn-Cotton Land Company, Edwards Land & Timber Company, Corporations, W. S. Edwards, E. F ... Johnson, 44 Mo. 247; Davidson v. Laclede Land & Imp ... Co., 161 S.W. 686, 253 Mo. 223; Miller v ... Corpman, ... S.W. 345, 234 Mo. 78; Laclede Land & Imp. Co. v ... Schneider, 177 S.W. 388; Swift v. Buford, 217 ... S.W. 980, 280 Mo. 432; Sligo ... In ... Davidson et al. v. Laclede Land & Improvement Co., ... 253 Mo. 223, 161 S.W. 686, the tax deed described three ... ...
-
Pruitt v. St. Johns Levee & Drain. Dist.
...clause thereof "and said last above tract was stricken off and sold." DePaige v. Douglas, 136 S.W. 345, 234 Mo. 78; Laclede Land & Imp. Co. v. Schneider, 177 S.W. 388; Swift v. Buford, 217 S.W. 980, 280 Mo. 432; Sligo Furnace Co. v. Hogue, 229 S.W. 190. (5) The court erred in not finding th......