Stevenson v. Swilley

• Decision Date: 17 February 1930
• Docket Number: 28420
• Court: Mississippi Supreme Court
• Parties: STEVENSON et al. v. SWILLEY

126 So. 195

156 Miss. 552

STEVENSON et al. v. SWILLEY

No. 28420

Supreme Court of Mississippi

February 17, 1930

Division B

1. APPEAL AND ERROR. Chancellor's fact finding on conflicting evidence will not be disturbed on appeal.

A chancellor's finding of fact upon conflicting evidence will not be disturbed by the Supreme Court on appeal.

2. REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENTS. Evidence held sufficient to sustain reformation of deed for misdescription therein:

In a suit to reform a deed for a misdescription of property testimony that the grantor was living upon property intended to be conveyed, having his homestead thereon, and reserving the right in the deed to live upon the lands the rest of his life, coupled with proof that he did not own the property actually recited in the deed, and did own the property upon which the homestead was situated, and that he had declared his intention to convey his lands to the grantee, is sufficient for the court to find that there was a mistake the grantor being dead and the grantee being disqualified to testify concerning the mistake, and there being no evidence to show that the grantor intended to convey, by the deed property that he did not own.

HON. G. C. TANN, Chancellor.

APPEAL from chancery court of Rankin county HON. G. C. TANN, Chancellor.

Suit by William Swilley against J. W. Stevenson and others. Decree for complainant, and defendants appeal. Affirmed.

Judgment affirmed.

Howie, Howie & Latham, of Jackson, for appellants.

The decree in this case was manifestly wrong:

First: Because there was no evidence to support the original bill;

Second: Because the testimony of all witnesses who had an opportunity of knowing about the condition of the old man's mind showed that he was not capable of transacting business at the time he made the deed;

Third: Because the deed itself is admittedly incorrect, and the only explanation of this is that the old man's mind was not functioning properly.

S. L. McLaurin and J. R. East, both of Brandon, for appellee.

The proven facts conclusively show that it was the intention of Stevenson to convey to Swilley the northeast quarter of northeast quarter of section 26, on which his house was situated, and that he himself reserved the right to reside on this forty acres as long as he lived. Thus mutual mistake was clearly shown and the decree of the chancellor finding the facts in favor of appellee will not be disturbed.

Argued orally by Virgil Howie, for appellant.

OPINION

Ethridge, P. J.

William Swilley filed a bill in chancery court to correct the deed to certain lands given Swilley by J. M. D. Stevenson, the ancestor of the appellants in this case.

It was alleged that on the 26th day of March, 1925, J. M. D. Stevenson, being the owner of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter (N. E. 1/4 of N.E. 1/4) of section 26, township 6, range 3, in Rankin county, Miss., and other lands, contracted and agreed to sell the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter (N. E. 1/4 of N.E. 1/4), and other lands, to the complainant for a valuable consideration, and in furtherance of said agreement did execute a deed, but by mistake in the description and the preparation of the deed there was included the northwest quarter of the northeast quarter (N.W. 1/4 of N.E. 1/4) of section 26, which the said J. M. D. Stevenson did not own; and there was omitted from the deed the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter (N. E. 1/4 of N.E. 1/4) of said section, which said Stevenson did own, and which was intended by the said Stevenson and his wife to be embraced in the deed.

It appears that J. M. D. Stevenson was a man very advanced in years, and that he owned the property in the deed, with the exception of that referred to above as being left out by a mistake, and that included which was put in by mistake, that there were...