Long v. Stapp

• Decision Date: 31 March 1872
• Citation: 49 Mo. 506
• Parties: WILLIAM LONG, Respondent, v. SILAS STAPP et al., Appellants.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

49 Mo. 506

WILLIAM LONG, Respondent,

v.SILAS STAPP et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

March Term, 1872.

Appeal from Iron Circuit Court.

G. P. Strong, and Crews & Laurie, for appellants.

I. The assignment of Johnson Campbell to William Morrison and Guy Bryan, on the back of Evans' deed, conveyed no legal title. At the most it could only transfer an equitable interest. It was neither executed nor acknowledged, so as to make a copy evidence, nor could an action of ejectment be founded on such a title; and this is the best title, and indeed the only title, under which plaintiff claims. (Thompson v. Lyon, 33 Mo. 219; Adams Eject. 33; Carroll v. Norwood, 5 Har. & J. 173; Eells v. Day, 4 Conn. 101.)

II. The deed of William Morrison to James Morrison was improperly admitted; only a copy was offered, and no title in William Morrison to the land mentioned in his deed was shown. The acknowledgment before an Illinois justice of the peace was a nullity, and the recording was unauthorized and did not make a certified copy evidence. No attempt was made to make a copy evidence under the statute. It was clearly incompetent. (Wagn. Stat. 595, § 32.)

Emmerson & Dillingham, and Van Alen, for respondent.

ADAMS, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court.

This was an action of ejectment commenced in St. Francois county, where the land lies, and taken by change of venue to Iron county.

The plaintiff claimed title to one undivided half of the north half of 640 acres, known as survey No. 2111, originally confirmed to Isaac Jackson and Stephen Evans. The plaintiff set forth his title in his petition at length, and exhibited the deeds and transfers under which he claimed title to an undivided half, or 160 acres, of the north half of the above survey.

The evidence showed that there had been a partition between Jackson and Evans, by which Jackson took the south half and Evans the north half of the survey. A paper signed by Evans showed the agreement for partition, the partition itself being by parol, and made prior to 1810. The plaintiff then, by various deeds and transfers, shows title to the undivided half of the north half of said survey. Among the title papers was an assignment on the back of one of the deeds by the owner of all his interests “in the within conveyance,” dated April 30, 1810, without seal.

The plaintiff claimed that he was a tenant in common with the defendant. The defendant's paper title showed that he was the legal owner of 480 acres of said survey--that is, he owned the south half, being 320 acres, and an undivided half of the north half, equal to 160 acres.

The defendant set up the statute of limitations, but there was no actual ouster or sufficient denial of the plaintiff's title and those under whom he claimed until 1858, when the defendant took a conveyance from his grantor, assuming to convey to him as sole owner the entire 640 acres. This amounted to an ouster of his co-tenant, and the statute commenced running from that time. This suit, however, was commenced in 1860, and of course the plaintiff was not barred by the statute of limitations, as only two years had elapsed, and the statute requires ten years' adverse possession to constitute a bar. The case was submitted to the court, sitting as a jury, and a verdict and judgment were given for plaintiff for the undivided half of the north half of said survey, equal to 160 acres. During the...