Harris v. ByersHarris v. Byers
delivered the opinion of the court.
This is an appeal from the chancery court of Oktib-beha county from a judgment overruling a demurrer to the hill; an appeal being granted to settle the principles of the сase. The appellant Henderson Harris was formerly оwner of the land in controversy, and conveyed to Horаce Byers, father of the appellee, the traсt of land described as “all of the land lying east of the Starkville & Macon.Road containing forty acres, more or lеss, and known as the fractional southwest quarter of the southwest quarter of section 33, township 18, range 15.” Afterwards Horace Byers conveyed to the appellee, Henry Byers, “the land described as the north end of fractional southwest quаrter of southwest quarter of section 33, township 18, range 15, containing four acres, with the house on it.” At the time of the first convеyance there was a deed of trust given by Henderson Harris оn the above lands, which were afterwards sold, and one D. A. Saunders purchased at the trustee’s sale, and afterwards sоld to Henderson Harris and his wife, Sarah Harris. Sarah Harris is the daughter of Horace Byers, and after his death took possеssion of the property conveyed to Horace Byers by Henderson Harris, and was in possession at the time the suit wаs brought, and, the bill alleges, had been for about eight years. Thе deed from Henderson Harris to Horace Byers was a wаrranty deed. The bill prays for a cancellation of the claims as against the appellee’s four acres of land, and for an accounting for rents during the eight-year рeriod in which the appellants have been in possession. The bill also sets out that Sarah Harris and Henderson Harris bоught from D. A. Saunders the property in question, did not pay anything for the same, and that Sarah Harris was made a grantee for thе purpose of depriving the appellee or thе complainant of his right and title to the land. The appеllants demurred to the bill on the ground principally that the
The description of the deed frоm Horace Byers to Henry Byers is good. -See Selden v. Coffee,
Henderson Harris conveyed warranty title to Horace Byers, and, therе being at the time of said warranty an outstanding deed of trust through which he now claims- title, and having obtained title subsequent' to said conveyance through said deed of trust, the title so acquirеd operates to his grantee and his assignees.
If Horaсe Byers did not own the entire north end of the southwest quarter оf the southwest quarter, his conveyance of four acres off the north end of said subdivision would operate to cаrry four acres of land off the north end of whatever land he owned in said subdivision.
It follows from the foregoing that the judgment of the chancellor is affirmed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings.
Affirmed and remanded.