Stokes v. Stokes, 2016 Ark. 182

In 1999 George and his wife executed and recorded a warranty deed conveying Chicot County farmland to their son Mason and grandson George II as tenants in common; George later recorded a power of attorney (POA) appointing himself to act for Mason and George II.
Mason and George II revoked the POA in 2007 and recorded the revocations.
In October 2009 George recorded a quitclaim deed purporting to transfer the same farmland back to himself, claiming to act under the earlier POA.
Mason sued in 2010 to quiet title, to void the 2009 quitclaim deed, and for related equitable relief; George counterclaimed seeking to set aside the 1999 warranty deed.
The circuit court: (a) granted summary judgment voiding the 2009 quitclaim deed (finding the POA revoked and/or George exceeded authority), (b) after bench trial denied George’s counterclaim and upheld the 1999 warranty deed as unambiguous, and (c) awarded Mason attorney’s fees under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-308 (later reduced).
On appeal the Arkansas Supreme Court affirmed the rulings on jury trial right, the 1999 warranty deed, and the 2009 quitclaim deed, but reversed the attorney’s- fees award as not authorized by § 16-22-308 in this quiet-title/unjust-enrichment action.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (George)	Defendant's Argument (Mason)	Held
Whether George was denied a constitutional jury trial	Jury trial on legal claims should precede equitable adjudication to preserve right	Setting aside deeds and accounting are equitable; no right to jury on equitable claims	Court: No violation—claims were equitable; no right to jury attached
Validity of 1999 warranty deed; parol-evidence admissibility	Deed was part of a larger oral agreement/condition; parol evidence should be allowed to show delivery/condition	Deed is complete, unambiguous, recorded, and presumption of delivery; parol evidence barred	Court: Deed unambiguous and valid; parol-evidence rule barred extrinsic terms; counterclaim denied
Validity of 2009 quitclaim deed executed by George under POA	Genuine issue of fact exists whether POA remained effective and whether George had authority to retake title	POA was revoked in 2007; George offered no proof of valid authority and breached fiduciary duty/self-dealt	Court: Summary judgment proper; quitclaim void because POA revoked and/or George exceeded authority
Entitlement to attorney’s fees under Ark. Code Ann. § 16-22-308	Fees allowed because deed is a contract and litigation is based on contractual obligations	Action is a quiet-title/unjust-enrichment action, not a breach-of-contract suit covered by statute	Court: Reverse fee award—§ 16-22-308 does not authorize fees for this quiet-title/unjust-enrichment litigation

First Nat’l Bank of DeWitt v. Cruthis, 360 Ark. 528 (discusses jury-trial right after merger of law and equity)
Duke v. Shinpaugh, 375 Ark. 358 (2009) (set-aside of deed where agent acted under undue influence/exceeded POA authority)
Crowder v. Crowder, 303 Ark. 562 (deed requires delivery; presumption from recording/possession may be rebutted)
Parker v. Lamb, 263 Ark. 681 (recording a deed drafted by grantor raises presumption of delivery)
Childs v. Adams, 322 Ark. 424 (fees under § 16-22-308 may be available when breach-of-contract actions seek equitable remedies)