O'Neal v. Love
2017 Ark. App. 336
| Ark. Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Dispute over title to Pulaski County property involving a 1994 warranty deed (unrecorded until 2014) and a 1999 quitclaim deed from Herbert Love to his sister Ethel Love.
- Herbert and Gloria Love held title as tenants by the entirety; Gloria claimed survivorship ownership when Herbert died in 2004.
- Adrianne O’Neal (Herbert’s daughter) asserted title through Gloria and brought an unlawful-detainer action against Ethel.
- Trial court initially quieted title to Ethel and Adrianne as tenants in common; this court in O’Neal I reversed, holding Gloria and Herbert were tenants by the entirety and remanded for consideration of Ethel’s adverse-possession and bona fide-purchaser claims.
- On remand (no new evidence), the trial court found Gloria became sole owner at Herbert’s death, but concluded Ethel was a bona fide purchaser for value (quieting title in Ethel), denied adverse possession, reformed the 1999 deed to add a fuller legal description, and held Adrianne’s unlawful-detainer claim time-barred.
- This appeal challenges the bona fide-purchaser finding, statute-of-limitations ruling on unlawful detainer, deed reformation, and adverse-possession findings; cross-appeal urges affirmance on adverse possession and the limitations bar.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (O’Neal) | Defendant's Argument (Love) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of Ethel as bona fide purchaser | Ethel had notice (Herbert was married) and could not be BFP; 1994 deed gave Gloria survivorship | Ethel acquired title by 1999 quitclaim and was a BFP for value | Court declined to decide BFP in finality; quitclaim interest invalidated because Herbert could not convey Gloria’s survivorship—remand directed to address adverse possession (trial-court BFP finding questioned) |
| Effect of unrecorded 1994 warranty deed | 1994 unrecorded deed vested Gloria with survivorship interest; therefore Herbert’s 1999 quitclaim did not pass full title | Ethel argued she obtained title by quitclaim and/or by BFP doctrine | Court (and this opinion) confirms that Herbert could not convey Gloria’s survivorship; Gloria became sole owner at Herbert’s death, which extinguished Ethel’s quitclaim interest unless adverse possession or other doctrine applies |
| Adverse possession claim by Ethel | Ethel claimed adverse possession based on color of title (1999 quitclaim) and possession/taxes | Adrianne disputed adverse-possession elements and statutory requirements | Court found trial court made no specific adverse-possession findings; reversed and remanded for findings on statutory elements (color of title, 7 years, taxes, and common-law elements) |
| Unlawful-detainer statute-of-limitations | O’Neal said Ethel’s possession was not adverse/continuous for limitations; therefore action not time-barred | Ethel asserted more than three years’ peaceful possession before suit, so unlawful-detainer barred | Because ownership remains unresolved and adverse-possession needs findings, appellate court declined to resolve the limitations issue and remanded for determination tied to ownership/adverse-possession findings |
Key Cases Cited
- Bill’s Printing, Inc. v. Carder, 357 Ark. 242 (discusses bona fide purchaser notice standard and inquiry notice)
- Wetzel v. Mortg. Elec. Registration Sys., Inc., 2010 Ark. 242 (recording statute and effect of unrecorded instruments)
- Davies v. Johnson, 124 Ark. 390 (tenancy by the entirety; survivorship prevents alienation of the other spouse’s survivorship interest)
- Whittenburg v. Moody, 468 S.W.3d 786 (Ark. Ct. App. decision summarizing common-law adverse-possession elements)
- Dye v. Diamante, 510 S.W.3d 759 (standard of review for bench trials)