Miller v. Corpman

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Missouri
• Writing for the Court: Railey
• Citation: 257 S.W. 428,301 Mo. 589
• Parties: MILLER et al. v. CORPMAN et al.
• Decision Date: 29 December 1923

257 S.W. 428 301 Mo. 589 MILLER et al.
v.
CORPMAN et al. Supreme Court of Missouri, Division No. 2. December 29, 1923.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Mississippi County; Frank Kelly, Judge.

Action by Anna V. Miller and another against H. C. Corpman and another. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

J. L. Fort, of Dexter, and H. S. Green, of Bloomfield, for appellants.

Statement.

RAILEY, C.

On February 2, 1915, plaintiffs Anna V. Miller and Susie Jeffers filed, in the circuit court of Stoddard county, Mo., a petition against appellants H. C. Corpman and Maggie Corpman, to ascertain and determine the respective titles, interests, etc., of said parties in and to the southwest quarter of the southeast quarter of section 28, in township 28 of range 10 east, located in Stoddard county, Mo. On the application of appellants, the venue was changed, and the case tried before the court without a jury, in Mississippi county, Mo.

Defendants answered, and admitted therein, that they claimed to be the owners in fee simple of the real estate aforesaid. They deny every other allegation in plaintiffs' petition. They further aver that in 1887 H. C. Corpman purchased all the outstanding title, if any they had, of S. P. Jeffers and Annie C. Jeffers, father and mother of plaintiffs, Annie V. Miller and Susie Jeffers, both of whom are dead, that said S. P. Jeffers and wife executed and delivered to Walter Phelan a power of attorney, vesting in him the authority to convey the land aforesaid, and that, pursuant to said power vested in him, said Walter Phelan sold and conveyed said land to defendant H. C. Corpman. They further aver that they have acquired title to said real estate by adverse possession under the 10 and 30 year statute of limitation.

The reply is a general denial of the new matter contained in said answer.

On October 22, 1917, the court found that plaintiffs are each entitled to an undivided one-fourth interest in said land, and that the defendants are jointly entitled to an undivided one-half interest therein. Judgment was entered in accordance with above findings. Motions for a new trial and in arrest of judgment were filed by defendants, overruled, and the cause duly appealed by them to this court.

Admitted Facts: It was agreed between the parties in interest that the title to the land in controversy passed out of the United States government and into the state of Missouri, on March 16, 1869, and that C. Alonzo Kitchen was the common source of title,

257 S.W. 429

and acquired the above land in his name, as above described, on September 21, 1869. It was admitted by plaintiffs that Mrs. Anna C. Jeffers was the only child of C. Alonzo Kitchen, at the time of the pendency of the tax suit, which resulted in the tax deed, offered in evidence by defendants, to Charles E. Stokes.

Plaintiffs' Evidence: Clara B. Burrus testified, in substance, that she was the grandmother of plaintiffs; that the mother of plaintiffs, was Anna C. Jeffers; that said Anna C. Jeffers was the daughter of witness by Cornelius Alonzo Kitchen; that Mrs. Anna C. Jeffers was the only child of that marriage; that she (witness) executed the quitclaim deed to Anna V. Miller and Susie Jeffers, who are sisters; that both plaintiffs are daughters of said Anna C. Jeffers; that Price Jeffers was the husband of said Anna C. Jeffers; that the latter died in 1901, and Price Jeffers died in April, 1914; that the husband of witness owned lands in Stoddard, Butler, and Dunklin counties, in Missouri; that she could not say her husband was ever in possession of the land in question; that her husband, Alonzo Kitchen, died in the spring of 1870; that she had no recollection of his claiming above land, and had no knowledge of his paying taxes thereon. Plaintiffs then offered in evidence, a quitclaim deed from Clara B. Burrus, to Anna V. Miller and Susie Jeffers, dated April 8, 1915. Appellants have not set out any part of said deed in the abstract, but objected to the introduction of same on the alleged ground that the grantor had no title. As the objection to the admission of said deed was overruled, we presume it covered the land in question.

Defendants' Evidence: Defendants offered in evidence, a sheriff's tax deed to C. E. Stokes, dated December 6, 1879, conveying the land in question, and which will be referred to later. Appellants also offered in evidence a warranty deed from Charles E. Stokes and wife to Henry Bohlcke, dated January 27, 1882, conveying the land in controversy, which will also be considered later. Defendants offered in evidence a warranty deed from H. Bohlcke and wife to H. C. Corpman, dated October 24, 1887, conveying the land in question. Defendants next offered" in evidence a quitclaim deed from Anna C. Jeffers, and S. P. Jeffers, to Walter Phelan, dated July 31, 1894, which was duly acknowledged and recorded; covering the undivided one-half interest of the land in question. Defendants offered in evidence, a warranty deed purporting to have been executed on November 27, 1894, by said Anna C. Jeffers and S. P. Jeffers, her husband, by Walter Phelan, their alleged attorney in fact, and by said Walter Phelan in his own behalf, conveying the land in question to defendant H. C. Corpman.

In order to avoid repetition, the foregoing and other testimony offered by defendants, will be considered in the opinion.

The case was submitted to this court upon the abstract of record, and briefs of appellants; no brief having been filed here in behalf of respondents.

Opinion.

I. This case having been tried by the court' without a jury, its finding of facts, if sustained by substantial evidence, is conclusive in this court. Lee v. Conran, 213 Mo. loc. cit. 412, 111 S. W. 115; Minor v. Burton, 228 Mo. 558, 128 S. W. 964; Slicer v. Owens, 241 Mo. loc. cit. 323, 145 S. W. 428; Abeles v. Pillman, 261 Mo. loc. cit. 376, 168 S. W. 1180; Buford v. Moore (Mo. Sup.) 177 S. W. loc. cit. 872; Truitt v. Bender (Mo. Sup.) 193 S. W. loc. cit. 839; Coulson v. La Plant (Mo. Sup.) 196 S. W. 1144; Roloson v. Riggs, 274 Mo. loc. cit. 528, 203 S. W. 973; Case v. Sipes, 280 Mo. loc. cit. 115, 217 S. W. 306, and cases cited; Christine v. Luyties, 280 Mo. loc. cit. 426, 217 S. W. 55; Cowan v. Young, 282 Mo. loc. cit. 45, 220 S. W. loc. cit. 872; Bingham v. Edmonds (Mo. Sup.) 210 S. W. 885; Nevins v. Gilliland, 290 Mo. loc. cit. 299, 300, 234. S. W. loc. cit. 819; Kline Cloak & Suit Co. v. Morris (Mo. Sup.) 240 S. W. loc. cit. 100; Barr v. Stone (Mo. Sup.) 242 S. W. loc. cit. 663; Zeitinger v. Hargadine-McKittrick Dry Goods Co. (Mo. Sup.) 250 S. W. loc. cit. 917. The trial court heard a large portion of the testimony offered by appellants, over respondents' objections, subject to the latter, and thereafter made no definite ruling in respect to said matters. The rule of procedure adopted by the trial court, in respect to foregoing matters, has been condemned by the appellate courts of this state. Seafield v. Bohne, 169 Mo....