Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

107 Miss. 750

Freeman v. Freeman

Mississippi Supreme Court

Decided March 15, 1914

Mississippi Supreme Court · decided 1914-03-15

Hon. W. H. Cook, Special Chancellor. Bill for partition by H. J. Preston against Gr. W. P. Freeman, and others. From a decree ordering partition, defendant appeals. The facts are fully stated in the opinion of the court. It is manifest that the learned special chancellor assumed that Wm.

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 1951

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1914-03-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Reed, J.,

¶1delivered the opinion of the court.

¶2Appellee filed a bill for partition of a tract of eighty acres of land in Perry county, which he averred was owned by his father, William Freeman, at the time of his death intestate. All the other heirs at law of William Freeman were made parties defendant. Appellant, a son of William Freeman, as a defendant, filed an answer to the bill, in which he denied that his father died seised and possessed of the land, and set up a title thereto in himself by virtue of deeds to him from the heirs of Alexander McKenzie, deceased. He also claiméd title to the *754land by adverse and hostile possession thereof for more than ten years.

¶3It appears in the proof that William Freeman purchased the land at an administrator’s sale of the estate of Alexander McKenzie some time during the years of 1866 or 1867. He went into possession of the land soon after his purchase, and it became a part of his residence property, and was occupied by him until his death in 1885. His widow continued in possession thereof until her death some years after her husband’s decease. Then a daughter had the use and possession of the land until she died, which was shortly before the filing of the proceeding for partition. A deed conveying the land to William Freeman could not be found. It is in testimony that the courthouse in Perry county, containing the records in which such deed should have been recorded, was burned after the date of the sale of the land to William Freeman, and all deed records therein destroyed. The deeds under which appellant claimed title to the land were made to him by the McKenzie heirs after the deaths of his father and mother.

¶4The chancellor, upon the hearing, decreed that the land was owned by the heirs at law of William Freeman, deceased, and ordered it sold for division of the proceeds. He also gave judgment against appellant and J. H. Over-street, another defendant, for an amount due for timber cut and taken from the land, and allowed appellant for taxes he had advanced and paid.

¶5The chancellor’s decree as to the title of the land and as to all questions in the case was upon the facts, and we will not disturb it. In truth, his decision is amply supported by the testimony.

¶6As appellant was an heir at law of his father, William Freeman, the conveyance of title to him by the heirs of Alexander McKenzie inured to the benefit of all of the heirs of William Freeman as cotenants.

¶7Affirmed.

/107/miss/750 · .json · Public domain