Soens v. Riggle, 6290
| Decision Date | 14 May 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 6290,6290 |
| Citation | 325 P.2d 709,1958 NMSC 63,64 N.M. 121 |
| Parties | Adolph SOENS, Appellee. v. Harry W. RIGGLE or H. W. Riggle and Nellie Mae Riggle, Appellants. |
| Court | New Mexico Supreme Court |
Emigh & Emigh, Durango, Colo., Gilbert, White & Gilbert, Santa Fe, for appellants.
Bentley M. McMullin, Denver, Colo., Simms, Modrall, Seymour, Sperling & Roehl, Albuquerque, for appellee.
Appellee, plaintiff below, brought this action to quiet title to an undivided one-half interest in oil, gas, and other minerals in certain lands in Rio Arriba County. Appellants contested and counter-claimed for an interest in minerals standing in the record name of appellee. From a judgment quieting title in appellee, appellants bring their appeal.
In July, 1931, the parties entered into a written contract by the terms of which appellee Soens was to purchase undivided one-half interests in oil, gas, and other minerals in Rio Arriba County. The interests so acquired were to be taken and held by appellee in his own name as trustee. It was alleged, and the court below so found, that due to difficulties arising between them that in 1933 appellant Harry W. Riggle, acting for himself and as attorney-in-fact for appellant Nellie Mae Riggle, made and delivered to Soens a written assignment and transfer of their interests in the minerals previously acquired by appellee, including the minerals involved in this action. This latter document, the assignment, was found by the court to have been lost.
The first question confronting us is whether the findings of the court are supported by substantial evidence. In this respect we will first discuss the evidence briefly as it relates to appellant Harry W. Riggle. The parties agree that appellee Soens was to purchase in his own name and hold as trustee the properties involved in this action. Testimony was introduced that the appellee advanced about $2,500 to Riggle for expenses and in making down payments on mineral interests purchased by him. On Riggle's refusal to make reimbursement for these funds, an accounting was demanded by appellee. There was evidence that Riggle had disposed of some mineral interests for at least $3,000 for which he had not accounted. After heated argument in which Soens accused Riggle of being a crook, liar and swindler, Soens demanded that Riggle transfer to him all of the Riggle interests in the minerals. The transaction was to include the transfer of Riggle's stock in the Governador Oil Corporation as well. An assignment of the Riggle interests was prepared in the office of Ben Russel, an attorney of Durango, Colorado, and it was signed in the presence of the attorney and one Harry Phillips, a well driller, both of whom had died prior to the trial. The assignment was then taken by Soens to the office of Alonzo Emigh, of Durrango, who at that time was attorney for Soens, and who died in 1937. From this point the document was lost.
Riggle himself testified as follows:
'
Riggle denied signing over the oil company stock but the witness Rose Shock, formerly Rose Giacomelli, at whose home appellant lived in 1933, testified to a conversation she had with him, as follows:
'A. * * * But for my own interest I was wondering if this certificate was of any value any more, and I thought, what happened at Governador, is it completely sewed up or words to that effect, and he says----
'Q. You asked him that question? A. Yes.
'Q. All right. A. For my own interests, and he says, 'Well, as far as I am concerned, it is,' and I says, 'Well, what do you mean by that?' 'Well,' he says, 'I have turned all my interests, all my interests, over to Soens,' and I says, 'What Soens,' and he says, 'Adolph Soens. * * *"
Further, the witness Perkins, also an attorney of Durango, Colorado, saw Riggle at Portland, Oregon, in August, 1956, and his testimony is as follows:
'Q. And what did you say to him (Riggle)? A. I said, 'Do you recall the time in 1931 in Rio Arriba County acquiring lands and mineral acreage with Adolph Soens?'
'Q. And what did he say in reply to that? A. He said, 'I don't know why you should bother me with that, for I assigned them everything."
Appel...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Fredenburgh v. Allied Van Lines, Inc.
...for the first time on appeal. See Supreme Court Rule 20(1) and (2) (§ 21--2--1(20)(1) and (2), N.M.S.A., 1953 Comp.); Soens v. Riggle, 64 N.M. 121, 325 P.2d 709 (1958); Mutz v. Le Sage, 61 N.M. 219, 297 P.2d 876 (1956); compare Consoer, Townsend & Associates v. Addis, 37 Ill.App.2d 105, 185......
-
Koran v. White
...Supreme Court Rule 20(1) (Sec. 21-2-1(20)(1), N.M.S.A.1953). See, also, Danz v. Kennon, 1957, 63 N.M. 274, 317 P.2d 321; Soens v. Riggle, 1958, 64 N.M. 121, 325 P.2d 709; and Metzger v. Ellis, 1959, 65 N.M. 347, 337 P.2d 609. In the second place, even though we do not deem it necessary to q......
-
J. A. Silversmith, Inc. v. Marchiondo
...issue by the pleadings, and upon which no ruling of the trial court was invoked, are not preserved for review on appeal. Soens v. Riggle, 64 N.M. 121, 325 P.2d 709. Although the trial court did not specifically make a finding on this issue, it was a material issue in the case for it would h......
-
Nally v. Texas-Arizona Motor Freight, Inc.
...not be considered by us. Koran v. White, 69 N.M. 46, 363 P.2d 1038. See also Metzger v. Ellis, 65 N.M. 347, 337 P.2d 609; Soens v. Riggle, 64 N.M. 121, 325 P.2d 709; Danz v. Kennon, 63 N.M. 274, 317 P.2d 321. We might also add that the question of whether or not appellee was an invitee or l......