Mills v. Damson Oil Corp., No. 54349
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi |
| Writing for the Court | Before PATTERSON, C.J., DAN M. LEE and HAWKINS, JJ., and SUGG; HAWKINS; Garwood; PATTERSON |
| Citation | 437 So.2d 1005 |
| Decision Date | 21 September 1983 |
| Docket Number | No. 54349 |
| Parties | Henry G. MILLS, et al v. DAMSON OIL CORPORATION, et al. |
Page 1005
v.
DAMSON OIL CORPORATION, et al.
Page 1006
Charles G. Copeland, Harry E. Neblett, Jr., Heidelberg, Woodliff & Franks, Jackson, for appellants.
Ed Brunini, Jr., Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, Jackson, Matthew Harper, Jr., Holifield & Harper, Laurel, Stanford Young, David Slaughter, Waynesboro, for appellees.
Before PATTERSON, C.J., DAN M. LEE and HAWKINS, JJ., and SUGG, Retired Justice. 1
HAWKINS, Justice, for the Court:
This case comes to us upon certification from the United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. See Mills, et al., v. Damson Oil Corporation, et al., 686 F.2d 1096 (5th Cir.1982).
Judge Garwood of that Court has written an analytical and detailed opinion. He has simplified involved facts. He has also carefully researched the history of the legal principles involved in this case, which have been of invaluable assistance to us.
We adopt without repetition the statement of facts of the Court of Appeals opinion. 2
Likewise, we are in full agreement with and cannot improve upon that Court's analysis of the previous decisions of this Court and the issues involved. No purpose would be served in restating or reiterating them. 3
QUESTION 1. Whether a defectively acknowledged and recorded deed imparts constructive notice if the defect in the acknowledgement is entirely latent?
This Court's answer to this question is "yes."
We recognize there is a division of authority, but we are convinced better reasoning supports the affirmative. See Amsterdam Lumber, Inc. v. Dyksterhouse, 179 Mont. 133, 586 P.2d 705, 711 (1978); Wayne Building and Loan Co. v. Hoover, 12 Ohio St.2d 62, 231 N.E.2d 873 (1967); Citizens National Bank v. Denison, 165 Ohio St. 89, 59 Ohio Ops. 96, 133 N.E.2d 329 (1956); 59 A.L.R.2d, at 1316, and cases cited therein.
QUESTION 3. Whether a married woman, who in 1940 joins her husband in a deed of his separate property which is
Page 1007
their homestead and which deed, though reciting that the grantors are husband and wife, does not recite that the property is homestead or the separate property of the husband and does not indicate that her joinder is pro forma or limited to a release of her homestead interest is estopped to assert an after-acquired title against the grantee in the deed?Under the facts of this case, the Court's answer to the question is "no."
The 1940 mineral deed conveyed a part of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
SB v. LW, No. 1999-CA-01540-COA.
...the sole basis for an initial custody decision, such factors should not be the sole cause of a modification of custody order. Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005. See also Rushing, 724 So.2d at 916 (citing Moak, 631 So.2d at 198). Nor should a parent be punished for their personal lifestyles or sex......
-
J.P.M. v. T.D.M., No. 2005-CA-00320-SCT.
...Page 771 She contends that Albright itself prohibits a chancellor from giving more weight to any particular factor. See Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005 ("Age should carry no greater weight than other factors to be considered . . . ."). She also cites to Hollon v. Hollon, 784 So.2d 943, 952 (Mis......
-
Sturgis v. Sturgis, No. 1999-CA-00321-COA.
...is the best interest and welfare of the child. Whittington v. Whittington, 724 So.2d 922 (¶ 10) (Miss. Ct.App.1998) (citing Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005). ¶ 27. The majority opinion takes the approach that when considering a change in custody, the chancellor must first identify a specific ch......
-
Lowrey v. Lowrey, No. 2007-CA-01988-SCT.
...to take into consideration the statutory guidelines and exceptions regarding child support. See Armstrong, 618 So.2d at 1280; Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005; Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101, 43-19-103 (Rev. 2004). See also Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 477-78 (Miss.1981); McKay v. McKay, 312 S......
-
SB v. LW, No. 1999-CA-01540-COA.
...the sole basis for an initial custody decision, such factors should not be the sole cause of a modification of custody order. Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005. See also Rushing, 724 So.2d at 916 (citing Moak, 631 So.2d at 198). Nor should a parent be punished for their personal lifestyles or sex......
-
J.P.M. v. T.D.M., No. 2005-CA-00320-SCT.
...Page 771 She contends that Albright itself prohibits a chancellor from giving more weight to any particular factor. See Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005 ("Age should carry no greater weight than other factors to be considered . . . ."). She also cites to Hollon v. Hollon, 784 So.2d 943, 952 (Mis......
-
Sturgis v. Sturgis, No. 1999-CA-00321-COA.
...is the best interest and welfare of the child. Whittington v. Whittington, 724 So.2d 922 (¶ 10) (Miss. Ct.App.1998) (citing Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005). ¶ 27. The majority opinion takes the approach that when considering a change in custody, the chancellor must first identify a specific ch......
-
Lowrey v. Lowrey, No. 2007-CA-01988-SCT.
...to take into consideration the statutory guidelines and exceptions regarding child support. See Armstrong, 618 So.2d at 1280; Albright, 437 So.2d at 1005; Miss. Code Ann. §§ 43-19-101, 43-19-103 (Rev. 2004). See also Rainer v. Rainer, 393 So.2d 475, 477-78 (Miss.1981); McKay v. McKay, 312 S......