218 So. 3d 1136
Miss.2017Background
- Lessor Rose Greer leased land to the Nunnerys; lease renewed annually and ran until 2025.
- Lease Section 3 provided that on Greer’s death her rights and obligations under the lease "shall ... be transferred to Linda Ball," who would receive payments.
- Greer later executed a will leaving all property to John Oakes; after her death Oakes was appointed executor.
- Executor Oakes sought declaratory relief arguing Section 3 was testamentary (a will substitute) and invalid for lacking will formalities; Ball claimed Section 3 was a valid assignment/third‑party beneficiary right.
- The chancery court upheld Section 3 as an assignment; the Court of Appeals reversed finding it testamentary and unenforceable; the Supreme Court granted certiorari and affirmed the Court of Appeals.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Oakes) | Defendant's Argument (Ball) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Section 3 is testamentary (i.e., a will) or a present assignment | Section 3 is testamentary in nature and thus invalid because it lacked will formalities | Section 3 is an immediate assignment of Greer’s rights (or created an enforceable third‑party beneficiary right) | Section 3 is testamentary and unenforceable; treated as a will that failed formalities |
| Whether an intended third‑party beneficiary (Ball) had a vested right during Greer’s life | Ball had no vested right; Greer’s provision operated only on death | Ball was an intended beneficiary whose rights were contractually protected and not revocable unilaterally by Greer | Ball, even if an intended beneficiary, had no vested, unmodifiable right during Greer’s life; therefore the provision is testamentary |
| Whether the lease itself remains valid and enforceable against the Nunnerys | N/A (issue framed by parties) | The lease remains valid; only Section 3 is at issue | The lease remains valid; the ruling affects only Section 3 rights to payments |
Key Cases Cited
- Wall v. Wall, 30 Miss. 91 (Miss. 1855) (early precedent treating instruments as testamentary when operative only at death)
- Ford v. Hegwood, 485 So.2d 1044 (Miss. 1986) (articulates test distinguishing present conveyance from testamentary instruments)
- Peebles v. Rodgers, 50 So.2d 632 (Miss. 1951) (applies the present‑conveyance rule to determine instrument character)