576 P.2d 1064 (1978)
The court reversed the judgment of the district court, finding that the conveyance of land that contained a "Mother Hubbard" description to appellee assignee was valid against the buyer (a subsequent purchaser).
The owner of gas and oil leases assigned her interest in these leases in a particular county to the assignee.
The instrument of conveyance contained a "Mother Hubbard" clause which described the land in question.
Later the owner sold her interest in one of her wells in the same county to the buyer.
The buyer filed suit to quiet title to the land.
The district court found in favor of the buyer.
The appellate court reversed the district court's ruling.
The buyer appealed and the court reversed the appellate court's holding.
- The statutes had indicated that the legislature had intended that recorded instruments of conveyance, in order to impart constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser or mortgagee, should describe the land being conveyed with sufficient specificity so that the specific land conveyed could be identified.
- The recording of the assignment from the owner to the assignee, that did not describe with sufficient specificity the property that was covered by the conveyance, was found not to be sufficient to impart constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser (such as the buyer).
- Because the buyer did not have actual knowledge of the prior assignment from the owner to the assignee, the later assignment to the buyer prevailed over the owner's assignment to the assignee.
The court reversed the judgment of the appellate court.
The court ruled in favor of the buyer in his suit to quiet title to gas and oil leases.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.