505 S.W.3d 80
Tex. App.2016Background
- In 1972 R.P. and Lloyd Fuller conveyed mineral interests in two Wheeler County tracts (277.26 acres) to their children; Jackson owns an undivided 1/12 mineral royalty interest (the disputed interest).
- The Bank foreclosed on interests encumbering those tracts in 1993; FBGA (the Bank’s nominee) received substitute trustee deeds and later conveyed interests twice—on Nov. 23, 1993 to Leete Jackson (recorded Dec. 3, 1993) and on Nov. 30, 1993 to Wildflower Production (recorded Dec. 14, 1993).
- The Nov. 23 instrument to Leete used the Fullers’ metes-and-bounds description and is the earlier conveyance Jackson claims superior title under; the Nov. 30 instrument to Wildflower described a larger tract that encompassed the 277.26 acres and used language conveying the grantor’s “right, title, interest, estate, and every claim and demand.”
- Wildflower asserted it was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice and sought declaratory relief that its later deed gave it superior title; Jackson counterclaimed asserting priority under the prior Nov. 23 deed.
- The trial court found Wildflower paid value, lacked actual or constructive notice, and acquired superior title, concluding the Wildflower instrument was not a quitclaim and that Jackson waived any argument that it was.
- The court of appeals reversed: it held the Nov. 30 instrument to Wildflower was a quitclaim deed (no covenant of seisin or warranty), that Jackson did not waive the quitclaim argument, and therefore Wildflower could not claim innocent-purchaser protection; judgment was rendered for Jackson as holder of superior title and the case remanded for related relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Jackson) | Defendant's Argument (Wildflower) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Jackson waived the argument that Wildflower’s deed was a quitclaim | Jackson: did not waive; parties’ stipulation required court to decide notice and bona fide purchaser status, which implies construing the deed | Wildflower: Jackson waived because stipulation limited issues and she didn’t raise quitclaim characterization separately | Held: No waiver — construing the deed was necessary to decide bona fide purchaser status, so issue preserved |
| Whether the Nov. 30, 1993 instrument to Wildflower is a quitclaim deed | Jackson: instrument conveys only grantor’s right/interest and lacks covenant of seisin or warranty — therefore a quitclaim | Wildflower: instrument not a quitclaim; similar language to other deeds (Bryan) supports treatment as a conveyance of the property itself and entitlement to innocent-purchaser protection | Held: Instrument is a quitclaim — it conveys the grantor’s right/title/interest, lacks warranty/seisin, and does not manifest intent to convey the property itself |
| Whether a grantee under a quitclaim deed can be an innocent purchaser for value without notice | Jackson: a quitclaim grantee is conclusively on notice and cannot be a bona fide purchaser | Wildflower: relies on Bryan v. Thomas to argue a deed purporting to convey the grantor’s undivided interest can still get innocent-purchaser protection | Held: A quitclaim grantee cannot claim innocent-purchaser status as matter of law; Bryan does not overrule that rule and applies only where instrument shows intent to convey the land itself |
| Who holds superior title to the disputed mineral interest | Jackson: earlier Nov. 23 deed to Leete is prior in time and superior; Wildflower’s quitclaim is subject to prior claims | Wildflower: later purchaser for value without notice should prevail under recording statute | Held: Jackson holds superior title; Wildflower’s quitclaim deed places it on notice and does not defeat Jackson’s earlier conveyance |
Key Cases Cited
- Cook v. Smith, 174 S.W. (Tex. 1915) (quitclaim conveys only grantor’s interest and puts grantee on notice of title defects)
- Bryan v. Thomas, 365 S.W.2d 628 (Tex. 1963) (instrument containing warranty language and intent to convey land may be more than a quitclaim; court must examine whole instrument)
- Geodyne Energy Income Prod. P’ship I-E v. Newton Corp., 161 S.W.3d 482 (Tex. 2005) (instrument characterization turns on grantor’s intent as shown by the instrument and circumstances)
- Woodward v. Ortiz, 237 S.W.2d 286 (Tex. 1951) (grantee under a quitclaim deed is on notice of other claims and cannot be innocent purchaser)
- Rogers v. Ricane Enters., 884 S.W.2d 763 (Tex. 1994) (quitclaim passes only what interest grantor had and does not by itself establish title)