Vincent v. Blanton

• Decision Date: 09 March 1905
• Citation: 85 S.W. 703
• Parties: VINCENT et al. v. BLANTON et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

85 S.W. 703

VINCENT et al. v. BLANTON et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

March 9, 1905

Appeal from Circuit Court, Edmonson County.

"Not to be officially reported."

Suit by John L. Vincent and others against John W. Blanton, Sr., and others. From a judgment for defendants, plaintiffs appeal. Reversed.

J. S Wortham, Milton Clark, and Wortham & Clark, for appellants.

J. S Lay, for appellees.

NUNN J.

In the year 1865 one S.D. Vincent purchased a tract of land containing 240 acres, known as the "Stice Survey," which was south of and adjoined a tract known as the "Mustaine Survey." S.D. Vincent was the guardian of M. H. and J. B. Minton. In the year 1877 he conveyed to the elder of his wards, M. H. Minton, 70 acres of this land off of the north end, which adjoined the Mustaine survey, in satisfaction of what he owed him as guardian. Soon after this, M. H. Minton conveyed 35 acres of this 70 to G. W Blanton, a son of the appellee, who conveyed it, a short time thereafter, to his father, the appellee. M. H. Minton sold the balance of this 70 acres--the west end of it--to one Wood Vincent, the father of appellants, and gave him a bond for title. Wood Vincent built a cabin on it, and lived there a few years, when he died. Soon after this his widow married again, and took these children, who were then small and of tender years, away from the county. Some time in the early 80's, S.D. Vincent sold the balance of this 240-acre survey to Rube Vincent, and took notes for the purchase price. Afterward his second ward became the owner of these notes in satisfaction of S.D. Vincent's indebtedness to him, and instituted an action to enforce the lien on the land for the payment of them. The land was sold under this judgment on October 6, 1884, and was bid in by D. W. Webb for J. H. Vincent, to whom the commissioner made the conveyance. Afterward J. H. Vincent sold the same to the appellee J. W Blanton, Sr. It appears that the boundary given in the deeds from the commissioner to Vincent and from Vincent to the appellee covered and included the whole of the 240 acres, the Stice survey. The appellants instituted this action against the appellees for the recovery of the 35 acres, the balance of the M. H. Minton 70-acre tract. They alleged that they were the only children and heirs of their father, Wood Vincent, and that they owned it under the bond for title above referred to, which had been lost by their mother. They also alleged that their father had paid Minton in full for the land, and they made M. H. Minton a party defendant to their action. He answered, and, in effect, admitted all the allegations of the petition. The appellee Blanton answered, and denied that they were the owners of the land, and alleged that the deed from S.D. Vincent to M. H. Minton had never been recorded, and that when he purchased the land he was ignorant of the existence thereof, and also ignorant of the existence of the title bond, if any there was; that when he purchased he had no knowledge or information that the appellants were the owners of, or had any interest in, this land.

He also pleaded the 15-year statute in bar of their right of recovery, and he further alleged that one Mason Morris was the owner of this piece of land claimed by the appellants, and that he, in the year 1893, purchased it, and received a conveyance from Morris therefor. Appellants controverted the affirmative matter in the answer.

It appears...