Morrison v. Byrd

Decision Date11 May 1954
Citation72 So.2d 657
PartiesMORRISON et al. v. BYRD et al.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Adams & Wade, Crestview, for appellants.

Jerry Sullivan, Pensacola, for appellees.

DREW, Justice.

Dock Byrd acquired title to 160 acres of land in Okaloosa County, Florida, shortly before the turn of the century. There he lived until his death in 1933, intestate. Surviving him, as lawful heirs, were seven children, one of whom bore the name of D. W. Byrd.

D. W. Byrd continued to reside on the homestead. In 1937 he acquired a tax deed thereto. On August 2, 1943, he and his wife sold the land to Esther S. Morrison, and conveyed title by warranty deed, which was immediately recorded. According to the record Mrs. Morrison promptly returned the same for taxes and has paid the taxes thereon since said time. She entered into the actual possession of the land and for more than seven years prior to the institution of this suit for partition by the remaining heirs of Dock Byrd, she cultivated a large portion of the tract, improved the fences and built new fences around the cultivated portion of the land, filled in gullies and used the unenclosed portion for wood and grazing and maintained the same against trespassers. Such, she alleged, constituted adverse possession under color of title and a defense to the action.

The lower court, after testimony was taken, held inter alia:

'The defendant, Esther Steele Morrison, claims title through D. W. Byrd, one of the surviving heirs of Dock Byrd, who, on December 6, 1937, obtained a tax deed to the property, subsequently, on August 2, 1943, conveying to Mrs. Morrison who is joined by her husband as a defendant. The defendant resist partition on the further ground of adverse possession for a period sufficient to vest title in Mrs. Morrison based upon the conveyance to her from one of the heirs, D. W. Byrd as above indicated.

'It appears by the evidence that the original owner through whom plaintiffs claim died in 1933, prior to the effective date of F.S. § 95.22 [F.S.A.] which contains a provision to the effect that the seven year statute of limitations mentioned in the first paragraph of the statute shall not apply in a case where the person through whom claim is made died prior to the effective date of the statute, that date being July 1, 1941, but that the twenty year limitation of Section 1 of Chapter 10168, Acts of 1925, C.G.L. 4659, should apply.

'Even if the seven-year statute of limitations is applicable the evidence fails to establish adverse possession in the light of adjudicated cases on the subject and under the circumstances here presented. No notice was brought home to any of the heirs except one who made claim to Mr. Morrison for his share of the purchase price but Mr. Morrison disregarded the claim on the theory that the complaining heir had no interest to be recognized, relying solely upon the validity of the tax deed issued to his wife's grantor, one of the heirs. It also appears that the heir who obtained the tax deed and conveyed to Mrs. Morrison was left by the other heirs in possession of the property with the right to use and occupy the same but with no right to dispose of their interests. In short, Mr. and Mrs. Morrison in purchasing the property relying upon the validity of the tax deed to their grantor did so at their peril. See Williams v. Clyatt, 53 Fla. 987, 43 So. 441, followed in Andrews v. Andrews, 155 Fla. 654, 21 So.2d 205; Spencer v....

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Crigger v. Florida Power Corp., 82-1156
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 30 d4 Junho d4 1983
    ...Law of Real Property §§ 2555 n. 38, 2556 n. 51 (1979 replacement by J. Grimes); 86 C.J.S. Tenancy in Common § 26.29 See Morrison v. Byrd, 72 So.2d 657 (Fla.1954).30 See, e.g., Williams v. Bruton, 113 S.E. 319, 121 S.C. 30 (1922); Verdier v. Verdier, 313 P.2d 123, 152 C.A.2d 348 (1957), cite......
  • Nelson v. Layne Stuart Davis & Mary Jo Davis of the Layne Stuart Davis & Mary Jo Davis Revocable Trust Dated 8-2-2011
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • 8 d2 Maio d2 2018
    ...Parsons v. Sharpe , 102 Ark. 611, 145 S.W. 537, 538-39 (1912) ; Smith v. Lemp , 31 Del.Ch. 1, 63 A.2d 169, 170 (1949) ; Morrison v. Byrd , 72 So.2d 657, 658 (Fla. 1954) ; Jordan v. Robinson , 229 Ga. 761, 194 S.E.2d 452, 455 (1972) ; Jordon v. Warren , 602 So.2d 809, 816 (Miss. 1992) ; Nels......
  • Albury v. Gordon, 63-621
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 19 d2 Maio d2 1964
    ...323, 324. And see Williams v. Clyatt, 1907, 53 Fla. 987, 43 So. 441; Spencer v. Spencer, 1948, 160 Fla. 749, 36 So.2d 424; Morrison v. Byrd, Fla.1954, 72 So.2d 657; and Gates v. Roberts, Fla.1956, 85 So.2d For the reasons stated and on the authorities cited above we hold that the ruling of ......
  • Diaz v. Security Union Title Ins. Co.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 14 d2 Junho d2 1994
    ...adverse title against heirs who knew that he claimed property through a warranty deed rather than as heir. See also Morrison v. Byrd, 72 So.2d 657, 658 (Fla.1954); Futch v. Parslow, 64 Fla. 279, 60 So. 343, 344 (Fla.1912). In Diedricks v. Reinhardt, 466 So.2d 375, 377-78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985),......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT