Smiley v. Thomas
Decision Date | 25 February 1952 |
Docket Number | No. 4-9703,4-9703 |
Parties | SMILEY v. THOMAS et al. |
Court | Arkansas Supreme Court |
L. Jean Cook and Frank S. Quinn, Texarkana, for appellant.
T. B. Vance, Willis B. Smith and A. G. Sanderson, Jr., all of Texarkana, for appellees.
Prior to April 1, 1925, O. K. Kendrick was the owner of a forty acre tract of land in Miller County and on that date executed a deed to J. W. Koonce, denominated 'Warranty Deed, Oil, Gas and Mineral Royalty,' containing these recitals: 'That we, O. L. Kendrick, a single man, for and in consideration of the sum of $100.00, One Hundred and No/100 Dollars, to us cash in hand paid by J. W. Koonce, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, do hereby grant, bargain, sell and convey unto the said J. W. Koonce and to his heirs and assigns forever, the undivided one-half interest in and to all of the oil, gas and other minerals, in, under and upon the following described lands lying within the County of Miller and State of Arkansas, to-wit:
Following the recording of the Koonce deed, the land on March 18, 1929 was conveyed, without exceptions, to Brice Williams. On July 10, 1929, Williams conveyed the land by warranty deed (without exceptions and without reference to the Koonce deed) to appellees, Mr. and Mrs. Thomas, who have held possession since.
In 1936, Brice Williams died intestate, leaving his mother, Mrs. Kate Williams, and appellant, Mrs. Jodie Smiley, his sole survivors and distributees. Brice Williams' estate was administrated and closed in 1938, and in 1940 his mother died intestate, leaving Mrs. Smiley her sole heir.
On December 4, 1950, appellees (Thomases) filed the present suit to quiet their title to the forty acre tract, in effect, alleging that by reason of the above outstanding 1/2 mineral interest conveyed by Kendrick to Koonce in 1925 and later to O'Brien Bros., Inc., the warranty in the deed of Brice Williams to them had been breached, that there had been a constructive eviction of appellees, that Mrs. Jodie Smiley, appellant, though called upon to defend appellees' title, has refused to do so, 'that that portion of the title thereto which has failed and been breached is of the value of $1250.00, together with items of expense, court costs and attorney's fee herein incurred;' that O'Brien Bros., Inc. acquired no valid title to the 1/2 mineral interest which they claim and by way of cross-complaint against O'Brien Bros., appellees (Thomases) assert claim to the 1/2 interest claimed by O'Brien Bros. through certain tax sales. Appellees (Thomases) prayed that title to the O'Brien Bros.' mineral interest be quieted in them but that should the court hold that O'Brien Bros. held a valid title to the 1/2 interest, then that they (Thomases) have judgment against Mrs. Smiley 'for the sum of $1250.00, for $_____ expenses incurred in attempting to remove such incumbrances against said land including $250.00 attorney's fee herein and for cost and other proper relief.'
Mrs. Smiley answered with a general denial and pleaded laches, limitations, statute of nonclaims, and that the suit was premature because there had been no eviction.
Appellee, O'Brien Bros., Inc., filed answer asserting title to the said 1/2 mineral interest by mesne conveyances from Kendrick, (being the common source of title), grantor in the first said mineral deed above, denied the validity of the tax deed under which the Thomases claimed title to the said 1/2 mineral interest and prayed that title to same be quieted in it.
The trial court found (in effect, quoting from appellant's brief) that the Thomases claim and that she is liable to respond to plaintiffs by reason of the breach of warranty in said Williams' deed.
'The court then finds that O'Brien Bros., Inc., is the owner of the Koonce undivided one-half (1/2) interest, and that all tax proceedings and sales of the interest should be cancelled and annulled and title quieted in O'Brien Bros., Inc., as to said one-half (1/2) mineral interest, and quiets the title in and to said one-half (1/2) interest in O'Brien Bros., Inc.
This appeal followed.
As to the interest of O'Brien Bros., Inc., which we first consider, we hold that they had title to a 1/2 interest in the oil, gas and mineral, and that the Chancellor was correct in so holding. Under the terms of the above deed from Kendrick to Koonce, Kendrick conveyed a 1/2 mineral interest to Koonce in fee (subject to the royalty lease, which has expired). O'Brien Bros. later obtained all the interest of Koonce. The above...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Wynn v. Sklar & Phillips Oil Co.
...If this clause were omitted, the deed would simply constitute a conveyance of 1/8 of the oil, gas and minerals. See Smiley v. Thomas, 220 Ark. 116, 246 S.W.2d 419. This insertion, however, makes the granting clause ambiguous. See Melton v. Sneed, 188 Okl. 388, 109 P.2d 509 (1940); Mabee Oil......
-
Trace X Chemical, Inc. v. Highland Resources, Inc.
...every lease contains an implied covenant of quiet enjoyment, citing Petroleum Collections, Inc. v. Swords, supra. In Smiley v. Thomas, 220 Ark. 116, 246 S.W.2d 419, the court cited an earlier case which apparently recognized the covenant for the quiet enjoyment of land. Although the Smiley ......
-
Atlantic Refining Co. v. Beach
...construed as creating a mineral interest. Prairie Oil & Cas Co. v. Allen, 2 F.2d 566, 40 A.L.R. 1389 (8th Cir. 1924); Smiley v. Thomas, 220 Ark. 116, 246 S.W.2d 419; Rutland Sav. Bank, etc. v. Steele, supra, but additional language in the instrument can change this result. Thus, a reservati......
-
Paddock v. Vasquez
...Citizens' Inv. Co. v. Armer, 179 Ark. 376, 16 S.W.2d 15; Rowland v. Griffin, 179 Ark. 421, 16 S.W.2d 457, 461-461; Smiley v. Thomas, 220 Ark. 116, 246 S.W.2d 419, 421; Segars v. Goodwin, 196 Ark. 221, 117 S.W.2d 43, 44; Richards v. Shearer, 145 Kan. 88, 64 P.2d 56, 58; Stanley v. Slone, 216......