Reeves v. Reeves, 51269

• Decision Date: 29 August 1979
• Docket Number: No. 51269,51269
• Citation: 374 So.2d 791
• Parties: Ernest REEVES v. Geraldine M. REEVES.
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Page 791

374 So.2d 791

Ernest REEVES v. Geraldine M. REEVES.

No. 51269.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Aug. 29, 1979.

Allen & Allen, Robert O. Allen, Brookhaven, for appellant.

Hobbs, Hobbs & Peeples, Ralph L. Peeples, Brookhaven, for appellee.

Before SMITH, LEE and BOWLING, JJ.

LEE, Justice, for the Court:

Geraldine M. Reeves filed suit in the Chancery Court of Lincoln County against Ernest Reeves to cancel a deed of conveyance executed to him. The chancellor granted the prayer of the bill of complaint and cancelled the said deed. Ernest Reeves has appealed here.

Appellee was married to Clark Reeves (brother of Ernest Reeves) on April 3, 1976, and on July 15, 1976, her husband conveyed to her 34.5 acres of land, the subject of this suit. Appellee and her husband executed a promissory note, secured by deed of trust, in favor of the Brookhaven Bank and Trust Company. In June, 1977, a deed of conveyance was prepared which purported to convey the property from Clark and Geraldine M. Reeves to Ernest Reeves. The consideration recited in the instrument was ten dollars ($10.00), cash in hand paid, and other good and valuable considerations. The deed was subject to any encumbrances in favor of Brookhaven Bank and Trust Company.

Clark and Geraldine M. Reeves signed the deed of conveyance before J. E. Morgan, Notary Public, on July 1, 1977. Clark Reeves left the notary's home with the deed in his pocket and drowned July 5, 1977, without further communication with his wife. The record indicates that on occasions Clark Reeves would become depressed and would leave home overnight or, sometimes, for three or four days. He was buried July 7, 1977.

After Clark Reeves died, the appellant and one other individual went to the home of J. E. Morgan to verify the execution of the deed. The instrument bore the date July 7, 1977, and inquiry was further made from the notary as to why the instrument was not dated July 1, 1977, the date it was signed by the grantors. His explanation was that he made a mistake filling in the month (7th) rather than the first day of July. Mr. Morgan changed the date of the deed from July 7 to July 1 in the presence of appellant and the other individual, and appellant presented same to the chancery clerk for recordation on July 6, 1977. The clerk noticed that the date had been altered and the attorney who now represents appellee was present in the clerk's office at the time the deed was presented. He noticed the change in date and had a photostatic copy of same made.

Appellee testified that she and her husband had agreed to sell the land to appellant for the sum of three hundred ten dollars ($310.00) an acre; that there was a distinct agreement between her and her husband that the deed would not be delivered to appellant until the purchase price was paid; that she did not deliver the instrument to appellant; that she did not authorize delivery of the deed to appellant except upon payment of the purchase price; and that there was no legal delivery of the instrument to him.

Appellant testified that no consideration was ever discussed for the deed and that none was to be paid for the transfer of the property to him; that Clark Reeves personally delivered the deed to him on July 1, 1977, without condition or restriction; that he knew nothing of the alteration of the deed date by Mr. J. E. Morgan, and he denied going to Morgan's house and asking him to change the date on the deed.

The outstanding mortgage to the Brookhaven Bank and Trust Company on the date of Clark Reeves' death was forty-seven hundred seventy-five dollars ($4,775.00), and life insurance covering him reduced the balance to approximately three hundred twenty-one dollars ($321.00).

Did the trial court err in cancelling the deed executed by Clark Reeves and Geraldine M. Reeves to Ernest Reeves on the ground that there was no delivery from the purported grantors to the purported grantee?

The appellant contends that the chancellor erred in setting aside the deed for the reason that (1) the burden of proving non-delivery was on appellee and she failed to meet the burden; (2) the court improperly admitted parol and hearsay evidence for the purpose of showing non-delivery, and (3) appellee acknowledged her interest in the property was acquired through fraud, that she held no equitable title in said land, that she was a mere trustee, and cannot be heard on the issue of non-delivery.

In Threatt v. Threatt, 212 Miss. 555, 54 So.2d 907 (1951), the grantor decided to sell land to his uncle's son after corresponding only with the uncle. The grantor had no contract with the grantee about the purchase of the land. He executed a deed in favor of the grantee and mailed it, along with a promissory note and deed of trust, to the uncle, with instructions to have them executed and filed before delivering the deed. The grantee acquired possession of the deed, how so was not shown, without executing...