Hay v. Kohl

Decision Date18 April 1995
Docket NumberNo. 19772,19772
Citation902 S.W.2d 850
PartiesBilly W. HAY and Carol Hay, his wife, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. Jack S. KOHL, et al., Defendants-Respondents.
CourtMissouri Court of Appeals

Thomas David Swindle, Swindle & Nunnery, Doniphan, for appellants.

Keith D. Sorrell, Spain, Merrell & Miller, Poplar Bluff, for respondents.

PARRISH, Judge.

Billy W. Hay and Carol Hay, husband and wife (plaintiffs), appeal a judgment quieting title to certain real estate in Ripley County, Missouri. The trial court determined that Elmer D. Sullivan and Georgette Tremaine were owners, as tenants in common, of the real estate in question. This court affirms.

The real estate that is the subject of this appeal (the disputed tract) is located in Ripley County, Missouri, and is described as follows:

All that part of the East Half of the Northeast Quarter of Section 14, Township 23 North, Range 1 West of the Fifth Principal Meridian described as follows:

Commence at the Intersection of the East line of the West Half of the Northwest Quarter of Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 1 West, and the Centerline of U.S. Highway 160 and run thence Westerly along the Centerline of U.S. Highway 160 1419.7 feet, more or less, to a point opposite an established fence corner; run thence North 18 degrees 04' West to the fence corner; continue North 18 degrees 04' West along the fence 776.7 feet to an iron pin for a point of beginning; run thence North 88 degrees 51' East to the Section line between Sections 13 and 14; run thence North along the Section line to the Northeast corner of Section 14; thence West along the Section line 648.9 feet, run thence South 18 degrees 04' East 1153.5 feet to the iron pin established as the point of beginning.

Elmer D. Sullivan's and Georgette Tremaine's Claim

Elmer D. Sullivan and Georgette Tremaine claim title to the disputed tract by virtue of a quitclaim deed in which they are grantees and Catherine M. Kohl, "surviving spouse of Jack Kohl", is grantor. The quitclaim deed recites that Jack Kohl died July 16, 1987; that he and Catherine M. Kohl were married at the time of his death, never having been divorced. It is dated September 26, 1991. It was recorded the same date.

Mr. and Mrs. Kohl owned other real estate that adjoined the disputed tract on its westerly side. The disputed tract was conveyed to them by quitclaim deed dated December 13, 1984, recorded December 14, 1984. Clarence A. Hay and Pearl Hay, his wife, (sometimes referred to in this opinion as the Hays and sometimes as Mr. and Mrs. Hay) were grantors. The deed recites, "This deed is given as part of an exchange of quit claim deeds between the parties hereto for the purpose of establishing a firm common boundary between the real estate owned by the parties."

Billy Hay's and Carol Hay's Claim

Plaintiffs claim title to the disputed tract by virtue of a quitclaim deed in which they are grantees and Robert Y. McCarthy and Anna B. McCarthy, his wife, are grantors. It is dated November 8, 1993. The deed was recorded December 16, 1993.

Clarence A. Hay and Pearl A. Hay conveyed certain real estate by warranty deed dated September 28, 1979, to Robert Y. McCarthy and Anna McCarthy, his wife. The real estate is described as "the following described Lots, Tracts or Parcels of Land, lying, being and situated in the County of Ripley and State of Missouri, to-wit:

Beginning at the N.W. Corner thence running 2000 feet East, to N.E. Corner thence running 965 feet to S.E. Corner, thence running 2000 feet West, to S.W. Corner and thence running North 965 feet to the beginning point, which is marked with an iron rod. Located in Section 13 and 14, Township 23, North, Range 1, West Containing 45 Acres, more or less. Easement for Highway 50 feet wide across East end of field."

Plaintiffs contend it included the disputed tract. The deed was recorded February 5, 1986. 1

Scope of Review

This case was submitted to the trial court on the basis of stipulated facts. As such, in considering the point presented by this appeal, the only question for review is whether the trial court drew correct legal conclusions from the facts that were stipulated. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 883 S.W.2d 530, 532 (Mo.App.1994). If there are conflicts among the facts stipulated, they will be considered as having been determined in accordance with the result reached by the trial court. Reed v. Reberry, 883 S.W.2d 59, 61 (Mo.App.1994). The judgment will be affirmed if the result reached is correct on any tenable basis. Id.

Issue Presented

Plaintiffs contend the trial court erred in declaring Elmer Sullivan and Georgette Tremaine owners of the disputed tract. This determination was based on a finding that the quitclaim deed from Catherine M. Kohl to Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Tremaine was a valid instrument. Plaintiffs contend that finding was erroneous; that the deed was not an effective conveyance because it was not supported by consideration and was not intended to convey title in fee to the grantees named in the deed.

In making their claim, plaintiffs rely on the rule that where a grantor has been induced to execute a deed conveying something of value for little or no consideration, equity will grant cancellation if the conveyance was the product of fraud, duress or mistake. See City of Gainesville v. Gilliland, 718 S.W.2d 553, 580 (Mo.App.1986). If the quitclaim deed is invalid, the later deed from Mrs. Kohl to Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Tremaine conveyed nothing. Under those circumstances, if the disputed tract is part of the real estate described in the 1979 deed from the Hays to the McCarthys, plaintiffs would prevail as owners of the disputed tract.

The Stipulation of Facts filed with the trial court includes:

Catherine Kohl would testify that she was approached by Clarence and Pearl Hay concerning a possible adverse possession claim by the Kohls against portions of the "Sullivan Tract." [ 2 Those claims were compromised by the exchange of Quit Claim Deeds between the Kohls and the Hays. Defendants' Exhibit "P" [a copy of the quitclaim deed from Clarence A. Hay and Pearl Hay, his wife, to Jack S. Kohl and Catherine M. Kohl, his wife, that describes the disputed tract] and "P-1" [a plat of the land described in Exhibit "P"] reflect the areas that the Hays released their interest to the Kohls. This Quit Claim Deed contains the "Disputed Tract." This was the first occasion that title to the "Disputed Tract" was shown in the Kohls.

In exchange, the Kohls gave up any claims to the original "Sullivan Tract" by a Quit Claim Deed. That property...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Hunter v. County of Morgan
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 22, 2000
    ...the result reached is correct on any tenable basis. Hadel v. Board of Educ., 990 S.W.2d 107, 111 (Mo. App. 1999) (citing Hay v. Kohl, 902 S.W.2d 850, 851 (Mo. App. 1995)). As such, in a declaratory judgment case "'we do not need to agree with the reasoning of the trial court in order to aff......
  • Williams v. Walls, 21290
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • February 10, 1998
    ...deed cannot be defeated in the absence of fraud, mistake, undue influence, or some other recognized equitable ground." Hay v. Kohl, 902 S.W.2d 850, 853 (Mo.App.1995). As heretofore mentioned, to establish a constructive trust, an extraordinary degree of proof is required. The evidence must ......
  • Hadel v. Board of Educ. of School Dist. of Springfield, R-12
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 11, 1999
    ...whether the trial court drew correct legal conclusions from the stipulated facts entered into by the parties. See Hay v. Kohl, 902 S.W.2d 850, 851 (Mo.App.1995). If there are conflicts among the facts stipulated they will be considered as having been determined in accordance with the result......
  • Celtic Corporation v. Tinnea
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • March 25, 2008
    ...invalidate it there should be "some other compelling circumstance" besides a mere lack of consideration. Id.; Hay v. Kohl, 902 S.W.2d 850, 853 (Mo.App. S.D.1995). More importantly, even if the consideration is for a deed is inadequate, the operative effect of the deed cannot be defeated in ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT