Saturday, January 4, 2014

Bowlin v. Keifer case brief

Bowlin v. Keifer case brief summary
246 Ark. 693 (1969)

CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant nephew challenged the judgment of the Franklin Chancery Court (Arkansas), which entered judgment in favor of appellee aunt in the nephew's partition action in which he claimed to be the owner of an undivided one-seventh interest in certain tracts of land. The chancery court based its holding, in part, upon adverse possession for the period of limitations by the aunt, laches of the heir, and estoppel.

CASE FACTS
The nephew claimed to be the owner of an undivided one-seventh interest in land. He also alleged that his aunt was also the owner of an undivided one-seventh interest. When the owner of the land died, he left the land to his seven children. One of those children conveyed his interest in the land to the aunt. The nephew alleged that that child's sole heir conveyed the land to him.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The chancery court entered judgment in favor of the aunt in the nephew's partition suit on the bases of adverse possession, laches, and estoppel.

DISCUSSION

  • The court reversed the chancery court. 
  • It held that the parties were tenants in common. 
  • In order for possession of one to be adverse to that of the other, knowledge of the adverse claim had to be brought to them directly or by such other acts that notice could be presumed. 
  • The aunt failed to show that her possession was adverse. 
  • Regarding the estoppel defense, there was no evidence that she relied upon the acts of her nephew or his grantor to her detriment. 
  • There was no undue delay on the nephew's part in bringing about his action to justify a judgment based on laches because the aunt had not suffered any change in position.

CONCLUSION
The court reversed the chancery court's decree and remanded the cause.

Suggested law school study materials

Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Search Thousands of Case Briefs and Articles.