Maze v. Bennett, 7532.

• Citation: 171 S.E. 249
• Decision Date: 10 October 1933
• Docket Number: No. 7532.,7532.
• Court: Supreme Court of West Virginia
• Parties: MAZE et al. v. BENNETT et al.

171 S.E. 249

MAZE et al.
v.
BENNETT et al.

No. 7532.

Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia.

Oct. 10, 1933.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Code 1931, 40-1-9 (protecting an Innocent purchaser of land) applied.

2. Allegations of a long period of time lapsing without a contract being performed, of material changes in circumstances which make performance onerous to one of the contracting parties, and of indifference by the other party to his right and his obligation under the contract, state a prima facie case of laches against the latter.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Calhoun County.

Suit by R. E. Maze and others against Hunter M. Bennett and others. From a decree sustaining a demurrer to the bill, plaintiffs appeal.

Decree reversed, and cause remanded.

James L. Smith, of Elizabeth, for appellants.

A. G. Mathews, of Grantsville, and S. P. Bell, of Spencer, for appellees.

HATCHER, Judge.

This is a suit to remove as a cloud upon the several titles of the plaintiffs to a tract of some 500 acres a partially executed compromise in writing made in 1S96 between their predecessors in title and other claimants of the land. The circuit court sustained a demurrer to the bill, and plaintiffs appeal.

In 1890, the Bennetts and the Mazes were in litigation over the tract, and they concluded a written compromise, stipulating (1) that the litigation should terminate, (2) that the Mazes should pay to the Bennetts $50.00 and "convey" unto them "¹/₁₆ of the oil and gas that may be produced and carried off said land, " and (3) that the Bennetts should release and quitclaim (by deed) to the Mazes all of their right, title, and interest in the tract except the ¹/₁₈ of the oil and gas as aforesaid. The bill, filed at March rules, 1932, alleged that all of the parties to the compromise agreement were dead; that the Mazes who signed the same were the joint) owners of the 500-aore tract; that they partitioned the same among themselves in 1897; that certain of the plaintiffs claim by inheritance from the Maze signatories of the compromise, and the other plaintiffs claim by purchase under the Maze title; that in 1928, and again in the early part of 1931, oil and gas in paying quantities were produced on the tract and now the Bennett heirs are claiming a ¹/₁₆ interest in the oil and gas; that plaintiffs never knew of the compromise agreement of 1896 or the claim of defendants thereunder until about May or June of 1931; that the agreement was not recorded until June 11, 1931; and that while (on...