Complainant and his wife’s mother were owners, as tenants in common, of an estate in fee simple in certain premises; and, dissension having arisen, he sold and conveyed to her for $1,200 his undivided half of the property, the deed containing the following provision, viz.: “Reserving all the timber and crops now on the said described land.” The complainant claims that the bargain was that he should have all the crops and timber then upon said land, and he removed the crops without objection, and sold the timber standing, and it was after-wards removed by the purchaser. Before its removal the defendant asserted title to one-half of the timber, claiming that the reservation in the deed covered only complainant’s
"We are convinced that the deed was executed and delivered upon the understanding by both parties that all of the timber upon the place was to become the property of the complainant, although it is conceded that the effect of the deed was to reserve but one-half. Upon the facts alleged, the complainant would be entitled to specific performance were the timber standing, and to a conveyance of the same. It having been removed, it is sufficient to declare that the equitable title to said timber is in the complainant and his vendee, and restrain the defendant from asserting further claim thereto.
The decree of the circuit, court is reversed, and a decree conforming to the views expressed above may be entered, with costs of both courts.