Syck v. Hellier

• Decision Date: 21 October 1910
• Citation: 131 S.W. 30,140 Ky. 388
• Parties: SYCK et al. v. HELLIER et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

131 S.W. 30

140 Ky. 388

SYCK et al. v. HELLIER et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

October 21, 1910

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pike County.

Action by Oscar Syck and others against Lida E. Hellier and others in which Polly Williams filed a cross-petition. From a judgment for certain of the defendants, plaintiff and defendant Polly Williams appeal. Reversed and remanded.

P. B Stratton, for appellants.

Butler & Moore and J. S. Cline, for appellees.

CLAY C.

Richard Syck, a resident of Pike county, Ky. died in the year 1891. He left surviving him Sallie A. Syck, his widow, and five children, namely, Oscar Syck, Polly Williams, Richard Syck Jr., W. B. Syck, and Orpha Ratliff. At the time of his death he was the owner of a large boundary of land just across the river from Pikeville. In 1876 Richard Syck owned another tract which was located on the waters of Chloe creek, some distance from his home farm near Pikeville. This latter tract is the one in controversy, and consists of about 223 acres. On May 18, 1875, there issued from the office of the clerk of the Pike circuit court an execution in favor of John Johnson against Richard Syck. This execution was levied upon the land in controversy, and it was sold by the sheriff of Pike county. A. J. Hatcher and others became the purchasers. They transferred their bid to Sallie A. Syck, the widow of Richard Syck. Pursuant to said transfer and payment, the sheriff on March 21, 1893, executed to her a deed to said land. Some time after the death of Richard Syck, his widow, Sallie A. Syck, instituted an action in the Pike county court against her children, alleging that she was the owner of all the land which her husband claimed to own at the time of his death, or, at least, a large part of the same, because it had been purchased with the proceeds of the sale of a farm which she had formerly owned. To this action Polly Williams filed an answer, and asked that the estate of her father, Richard Syck, be settled. Sallie A. Syck then withdrew her petition, and asked that she be made a party defendant. By answer she set up claim to both tracts of land. The case was afterwards transferred to the Pike circuit court. Some proof was heard, but before the determination of the questions involved, an agreed judgment was entered. The court held that Sallie A. Syck's purchase of the Chloe creek tract of 223 acres inured to the benefit of her children, but that she had lien thereon to secure the payment of the sum of $225, with interest from March 21, 1893. The court further adjudged that both the home farm and the Chloe creek tract descended to Richard Syck's children as his heirs at law, subject to Sallie A. Syck's right to homestead and dower therein. She was then awarded possession, use, and control of the home farm during life. From the commissioner's report filed in said action it develops that Richard Syck's indebtedness amounted to about $463, and that his personal property, over and above that allotted to the widow, was not sufficient to pay his debts. After the widow took possession of the home farm, she seems to have allotted certain portions of it to her children.

On December 4, 1897, Sarah A. Syck, Polly Williams, Richard Syck, and Maggie Syck, his wife, W. B. Syck and Ella Syck, his wife, Orpha Ratliff, and R. H. Ratliff, her husband, conveyed by deed the Chloe creek tract of 223 acres to R. A. Hellier. The consideration was $446 cash. At the time of this conveyance Oscar Syck was an infant and Polly Williams was a married woman. Her husband did not unite with her in the deed, nor had he theretofore made conveyance of the property to the grantee. On January 26, 1901, R. A. Hellier and wife conveyed the surface of the land in controversy to Anna L. Huffman. Thereafter Anna L. Huffman died, leaving surviving her two children, Eliner Hatcher and Joe Huffman, both under age. R. A. Hellier died in the year 1907 intestate, and left surviving him his widow, Lida E. Hellier and two infant sons, Charles E. Hellier and James Earl Hellier. On August 19, 1902, the Big Sandy Company, a corporation, purchased the coal and mineral rights in and under the land in controversy from R. A. Hellier, trustee, R. A. Hellier and Lida E. Hellier.

Appellant Oscar Syck brought this action within 10 years after reaching his majority against Lida E. Hellier and others, claiming an interest in the land under the conveyances referred to, and asking that the deed of December 4, 1897, to R. A. Hellier be set aside on the ground of his being an infant at the time of its execution. Appellant Polly Williams, who was made a defendant to the action, came in by answer and cross-petition, and charged that the deed, so far as she was concerned, was void because she was a married woman at the time, and her husband had not united with her in the deed or theretofore conveyed his interest therein to the grantee. Appellees, after denying the allegations of the petition and answer and cross-petition of Polly Williams, defended on two grounds: First, ratification and estoppel; second, that the legal title to the tract in controversy was in Sallie A Syck; that the parties to the action in the Pike circuit court, wherein the title to the land in controversy was involved, failed to file a lis pendens notice under section 2358a, Ky. St. (Russell's St. § 18); and that appellees were innocent purchasers of the property for value without notice. Appellants demurred to the paragraphs of the respective...