McQuitty v. Steckdaub

• Decision Date: 01 December 1916
• Docket Number: No. 18002.,18002.
• Citation: 190 S.W. 590
• Parties: McQUITTY v. STECKDAUB.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

190 S.W. 590

McQUITTY v. STECKDAUB.

No. 18002.

Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 1.

December 1, 1916.

Motion to Modify Judgment Overruled December 20, 1916.

Motion to Transfer to Court in Banc Overruled January 2, 1917.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Boone County; David H. Harris, Judge.

Action by Harriett McQuitty against D. C. Steckdaub, in which the petition contained a count in equity to have plaintiff declared the holder of the legal title to a tract of land under a contract for its purchase and a count in ejectment to recover possession of the land. Separate judgments for plaintiff on the second count in conformity with a verdict for the defendant on the first count for want of necessary parties, and defendant appeals from the judgment on the second count. Reversed and remanded, with directions.

E. W. Hinton, of Chicago, Ill., and N. T. Gentry, of Columbia, for appellant. J. L. Stephens and H. A. Collier, both of Columbia, for respondent.

BOND, J.

I. This is an action in two counts for the recovery of real property; the first in the nature of a suit in equity, alleging that the plaintiff was the equitable owner of the 40-acre tract of land in controversy by virtue of a contract with W. R. Wilhite, since deceased, who owned the property at the time of his death on October 7, 1905; that in January, 1906, plaintiff sued the administrators of W. R. Wilhite, and in February, 1906, obtained a decree vesting title in her, which was reversed by the Supreme Court in March, 1909 (McQuitty v. Wilhite, 218 Mo. 586, 117 S. W. 730, 131 Am. St. Rep. 561), because the heirs of said Wilhite were not made parties; that prior to that time, to wit, November, 1906, one of the heirs of said Wilhite, having acquired the interests of the other heirs, conveyed the 40 acres of land in dispute to the defendant, Steckdaub, who took with full notice of plaintiff's claim of title; that in 1909, after the reversal of her judgment against the administrators, the plaintiff brought suit for specific performance of the contract of their ancestor against the heirs of said Wilhite, deceased, and obtained a decree divesting title out of them and vesting title in her to said land, which decree was affirmed by the Supreme Court in 1912 (247 Mo. 163, 152 S. W. 598).

The first count of the petition upon the foregoing facts prayed that the deed to Steckdaub be so reformed as to exclude therefrom said 40-acre tract of land, adding a prayer for general relief. The second count of the petition was an action of ejectment in the ordinary form for the recovery of possession of said 40 acres of land, the monthly rents and profits, and damages for withholding the same.

On June 25, 1913, a jury trial was had on the issues joined in the second count, and a verdict was rendered that plaintiff was entitled to possession of the real estate and the assessment of damages in the sum of $100 and the monthly rents and profits at $14. This verdict was received and the jury discharged, and thereupon, on the 26th day of June, 1913, the court rendered a judgment on said second count in conformity with the verdict of the jury.

Thereafter, on July 4, 1913, the court rendered a distinct and separate judgment on the first count of plaintiff's petition in the following words and figures (omitting caption):

"Now on this day, this cause coming on for final determination by the court upon the cause of action set out in the first count of plaintiff's petition, same having been heretofore submitted to the court upon the pleadings and proof, and by the court taken under advisement until this day, the court, being fully advised in the premises, doth find that on the 7th day of October, 1905, one W. R. Wilhite died, intestate, in Boone county, Mo., and at the date of his death was the record owner of 40 acres of land described in plaintiff's petition; that on the 5th day of January, 1906, the plaintiff, Harriett McQuitty, filed suit in this court against R. L. Wilhite, I. V. Evans, as administrators of the estate of W. R. Wilhite, deceased, claiming title to said land under a certain oral contract and agreement entered into by and between the said Harriett McQuitty and the said W. R. Wilhite during his lifetime; that on the 23d day of February, 1906, a decree was entered by this court vesting title to said land in plaintiff, but which judgment and decree was reversed by the Supreme Court of Missouri, as shown by the mandate, judgment, and opinion of said court filed with the clerk of this court on the _____ day of _____, 1909; that thereupon plaintiff instituted a second suit in this court against all of the legal heirs of the said W. R. Wilhite, deceased, claiming title to said land under said contract entered into by and between her and the said W. R. Wilhite during his lifetime, and a decree of this court at the October, 1909, term thereof was rendered and entered vesting title to said land in plaintiff, and which said judgment and decree of this court was by the Supreme Court of Missouri in all things sustained and affirmed, as shown by the mandate, judgment, and opinion of said Supreme Court filed with the clerk of this court on the ____ day of January, 1913. The court further finds that prior to November 1, 1906, one R. L. Wilhite acquired, by deeds offered in evidence, the interest or title of all the other heirs of the said W. R. Wilhite, deceased, to the land described in plaintiff's petition, and on the 1st day of November, 1906, that the said R. L. Wilhite and wife by warranty deed conveyed said land to the defendant, D. C. Steckdaub; that on that date of said conveyance by said R. L. Wilhite and wife to defendant the said judgment and decree of this court entered in the original action affecting title to said land and brought by plaintiff against the said administrators of the estate of W. R. Wilhite, deceased, had not been set aside or reversed by the Supreme Court of Missouri, and the court finds from the evidence that at the time the defendant purchased said land and accepted said deed from R. L. Wilhite and wife on November 1, 1906, he (defendant) had notice and knowledge of plaintiff's claim of title to said land, and that defendant was not and is not an innocent purchaser for value of said land, but that at the time he purchased same and went into possession thereof he had notice of plaintiff's claim of title thereto. The court further finds as a matter of law, and so declares, that plaintiff cannot be awarded in this proceeding the relief sought in the first count of her petition, for the reason that all persons necessary to a determination of the issues therein joined have not...