McCoy v. Love case brief summary
382 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 1980)
CASE FACTS
Petitioner land owner owned an undivided one-fifth interest in the minerals underlying a 75 acre land tract. Petitioner could not read or write. Petitioner orally agreed to sell purchaser two of the 15 mineral acres. Purchaser gave petitioner a fraudulent deed covering the entire 75 acres. Petitioner signed the deed after her daughter stated that she guessed it was alright. Purchasers conveyed the thirteen seventy-fifths (13/75ths) interest to respondents. Petitioner brought an action seeking the cancellation of a deed.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The trial court granted the cancellation based on fraud. The lower court reversed.
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSION
The court quashed the lower court's ruling for respondents and remanded. The court held that no findings of fact were made on the issue of the good faith of respondents, thus further proceedings were required; and where all essential legal requisites of a deed are present, it conveys legal title.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
382 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 1980)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Petitioners sought review of a decision
of the District Court of Appeal (Florida) that reversed a trial court
ruling that granted the cancellation of a deed and determined that
the conveyance of the deed was induced by trick and fraud.CASE FACTS
Petitioner land owner owned an undivided one-fifth interest in the minerals underlying a 75 acre land tract. Petitioner could not read or write. Petitioner orally agreed to sell purchaser two of the 15 mineral acres. Purchaser gave petitioner a fraudulent deed covering the entire 75 acres. Petitioner signed the deed after her daughter stated that she guessed it was alright. Purchasers conveyed the thirteen seventy-fifths (13/75ths) interest to respondents. Petitioner brought an action seeking the cancellation of a deed.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The trial court granted the cancellation based on fraud. The lower court reversed.
DISCUSSION
- The court quashed the lower court's ruling for respondents and remanded holding that where all the essential legal requisites of a deed are present, it conveys legal title.
- There were no findings of fact on the issue of the good faith of respondents, thus further proceedings were required.
CONCLUSION
The court quashed the lower court's ruling for respondents and remanded. The court held that no findings of fact were made on the issue of the good faith of respondents, thus further proceedings were required; and where all essential legal requisites of a deed are present, it conveys legal title.
Recommended Supplements and Study Aids for Property Law
No comments:
Post a Comment