West v. Arrington
| Decision Date | 07 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 43831,43831 |
| Citation | 183 So.2d 824 |
| Parties | Rufus Martin WEST et al. v. Mrs. Margaret ARRINGTON et al. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Shannon Clark, Waynesboro, for appellants.
W. Vol Jones, Wm. Vol Jones, Jr., Waynesboro, for appellees.
The principal question involved in this case is the interpretation of a reservation of oil, gas and mineral rights in a conveyance.
S. B. Daws owned the surface of a tract of the land involved in this suit and an undivided one-fourth of the oil, gas and other minerals which may be produced, saved and marketed from said land. On May 22, 1940, Daws conveyed the land to B. C. Arrington by a deed which contained the following reservation:
It is further understood and agreed that the grantor herein retains all of the oil, gas and mineral rights in, on and under the above described lands with the right of ingress and egress for a period of 12 years from this date.
Prior to the expiration of the foregoing reservation and on February 20, 1950, B. C. Arrington and his wife, Margaret Arrington, conveyed to Van H. West by general warranty deed the aforementioned land with the following clause in the deed, towit:
All oil, gas and minerals and all oil, gas and mineral rights belonging to or appurtenant to said land is hereby reserved and excepted from this conveyance, said oil, gas and minerals and mineral rights having heretofore been reserved and excepted, and are not owned by grantor.
Thereafter Van H. West went into possession of the land and remained in uninterrupted actual possession for more than ten years.
The present suit was filed by B. C. Arrington and his grantees against the successors in title to Van H. West. The purpose of the suit was to confirm title in the complainants to one-fourth of one-eighth of the holding of all oil, gas and other minerals which may be produced, saved and marketed from said land. The owner of the leasing rights had leased the lands, which lease provided for royalty of one-eighth of the whole of the oil, gas and other minerals which may be produced and saved from said lands. It was alleged in the bill of complaint that Van H. West and his grantees were claiming certain rights in the oil, gas and other minerals, and the prayer of the bill was to cancel the claims of West and his grantees.
The answer and cross-bill of the defendants admitted the essential averments of the original bill concerning the aforementioned deeds and the reservations contained therein, but denied that the deed from Arrington to Van H. West reserved any estate in the oil, gas and other minerals. Their cross-bill charged that there was an agreement between B. C. Arrington and his wife, Margaret Arrington, and Van H. West and that the latter was purchasing the entire interest in said property, including any interest in the oil, gas and other minerals. The defendants also averred adverse possession and contended that there had never been a severance of the mineral estate from the surface ownership and that title had been lost by the adverse possession of Van H. West and his successors in title.
The court sustained complainants' demurrer and dismissed the cross-bill and confirmed title in the complainants. No evidence was heard. The chancellor was of the opinion that the demurrer to the crossbill went to the heart of the case, and with this, we agree. The defendants and cross-complainants prosecuted an appeal to this Court.
The principal question is whether the reservation in the deed from the Arringtons to West was sufficient to reserve the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Pursue Energy Corp. v. Perkins
...meaning when its clear idea is reasonably clear") (citing Henderson v. State, 445 So.2d 1364, 1366-68 (Miss.1984)); see also Arrington, 183 So.2d at 825. When an instrument's substance is determined to be clear or unambiguous, the parties' intent must be effectuated. Pfisterer, 320 So.2d at......
-
Thornhill v. System Fuels, Inc.
...So.2d 1364, 1366-68 (Miss.1984). Nor should mismatched subjects and verbs necessarily infect a sentence's sense. See West v. Arrington, 183 So.2d 824, 825 (Miss.1966). Still in the overwhelming majority of cases I would accord the work of Noah Webster and the Strunk & White 24 a higher stat......
-
Knight v. McCain
...merger is firmly ingrained in Mississippi law. Previous negotiations or contracts are merged into a deed of conveyance. West v. Arrington, 183 So.2d 824, 827 (Miss.1966); Brown v. King, 214 Miss. 437, 58 So.2d 922, 923 (1952). A general statement expresses the doctrine thusly: "that the acc......
-
Howard v. Clanton
..."prudently" in that all prior negotiations and contracts are ordinarily thought merged into the deed of conveyance. See West v. Arrington, 183 So.2d 824, 827 (Miss.1966); but see, Phillips Petroleum Company v. Stack, 231 So.2d 475, 481-82 (Miss.1970).3 The nature of the claim asserted by Ho......