Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Brady v. Powell
Citations: 217 Ark. 694; 233 S.W.2d 61; 1950 Ark. LEXIS 488Docket: 4-9234
Court: Supreme Court of Arkansas; October 16, 1950; Arkansas; State Supreme Court
Signa Powell initiated legal proceedings in August 1949, claiming ownership of a 40-acre tract of land in Woodruff County, Arkansas, which she stated she acquired in September 1937. She asserted continuous and open possession of this land up to an old fence row that marked the boundary with an adjacent 80-acre tract owned by the McGowan Estate. Her husband, George W. Powell, purchased the 80-acre tract in March 1945 and subsequently sold it to J.B. Brady in April 1945, with Signa acknowledging her relinquishment of dower rights in the warranty deed. Signa claimed that a mutual mistake occurred in the deed, where "we" was used instead of "I," which misrepresented her interest in the property. She sought an injunction against Brady's construction of a fence, reformation of the deed to clarify her non-obligation as a guarantor, and confirmation of her title to the land up to the old fence. Brady responded with a general denial and sought to confirm his title to the entire 80-acre tract or, alternatively, a reduction in the purchase price due to the disputed 3.3 acres. The trial court ruled in favor of Signa, affirming her ownership of the described tract and confirming the boundary up to the old fence. The court recognized the mutual mistake in the warranty deed and ordered its reform to accurately convey only the portion of the property east of the old fence row. George Powell was found not to have breached any warranty in his deed to Brady, leading to a decree that denied Brady any relief, which he subsequently appealed. The evidence indicated that Signa Powell acquired the disputed 40-acre tract in 1937 and had occupied it up to a long-established fence line, asserting adverse possession for over seven years, which justified the Chancellor's award of this land to her. The ruling confirmed that Signa Powell solely owned the awarded land while her husband owned the adjacent 80-acre tract, which he conveyed to Brady, who acknowledged that he was only purchasing her dower rights. The court identified a mutual mistake in the deed from Powell to Brady, warranting reformation of the deed as per Signa Powell's claims. The court also upheld Brady's right to a price abatement for the deficiency of 3.3 acres in the 80-acre tract, emphasizing that the sale was by the acre and that the quantity was essential to the contract. The ruling reiterated that in cases of misrepresentation regarding land quantity, purchasers are entitled to a price adjustment based on the shortfall. Consequently, the decree regarding Signa Powell was affirmed, while the decree concerning the price abatement was reversed and remanded to the Chancery Court for a new decree.