Giles v. Sheridan
1965 Neb. LEXIS 435, 179 Neb. 257, 137 N.W.2d 828 (1965)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A joint tenancy is severed when one joint tenant conveys their interest to a third party, converting their interest and that of their grantee to a tenancy in common, while the remaining joint tenants maintain their joint tenancy among themselves. Additionally, a joint tenant who pays off an encumbrance on jointly held property, which all grantees assumed, is entitled to contribution from the other co-tenants.
Facts:
- Minnie Giles, who was 83 years old, acquired Lot 3, Randolph Terrace Third Addition, with John V. Sheridan and Helen M. Sheridan.
- The deed, dated October 31, 1962, described the grantees as Minnie Giles, a single person, and John V. Sheridan and Helen M. Sheridan, husband and wife, as joint tenants and not as tenants in common.
- The purchase price for the property was $33,325, with Minnie Giles depositing $1,000 with the offer, agreeing to assume a $20,500 mortgage, and paying the balance.
- Minnie Giles paid $12,121.04 to the grantors at the consummation of the sale, and the deed specified that the grantees assumed and agreed to pay the existing mortgage.
- On December 28, 1962, Minnie Giles paid $19,003.96 to the First Federal Savings and Loan Association to pay off the mortgage, while Helen M. Sheridan paid $686.49 for the mortgage and $257.95 for taxes.
- On November 9, 1963, Minnie Giles conveyed an undivided 1/20 of her interest in the property, subject to a life estate, to her nephew, Harley Giles.
- Helen M. Sheridan died on February 23, 1964, and was survived by her husband John V. Sheridan and their three children.
Procedural Posture:
- Minnie Giles filed an equitable action in a state trial court (district court) on May 27, 1963, seeking to determine and establish the interests of the parties in Lot 3, Randolph Terrace Third Addition, and for partition.
- Helen M. Sheridan, an initial defendant, died on February 23, 1964.
- Minnie Giles filed a third amended petition on April 28, 1964.
- John V. Sheridan filed a cross-petition on June 4, 1964.
- Service was perfected on minor children of Sheridan, Barbara's spouse, and Harley Giles and his spouse, and a guardian ad litem was appointed for the minor defendants.
- Trial was held on July 21, 1964.
- A decree was entered by the trial court on March 5, 1965, confirming the shares of the parties and appointing a referee, finding that Minnie Giles held 19/20 of a 1/3 interest plus $13,135.50 from co-tenants for mortgage payment (with a lien), Harley Giles held an undivided 1/60 interest subject to Minnie Giles's life estate, and John V. Sheridan held a 2/3 interest subject to being charged with $13,135.50 to Minnie Giles.
- John V. Sheridan (appellant) perfected an appeal to the Supreme Court of Nebraska.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
1) Does a joint tenant who conveys a portion of their interest to a third party sever the entire joint tenancy, or does it only affect their own interest while other joint tenants remain in joint tenancy among themselves? 2) Is a joint tenant who pays off an encumbrance on the property entitled to contribution from co-tenants when the deed specified that all grantees assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage?
Opinions:
Majority - Spencer, J.
No, a joint tenant who conveys a portion of their interest to a third party only severs the joint tenancy as to their own interest and their grantee's interest, while the remaining joint tenants maintain their joint tenancy among themselves. Yes, a joint tenant who pays off an encumbrance on the property is entitled to contribution from co-tenants when the deed specified that all grantees assumed and agreed to pay the mortgage. The court held that the deed created a joint tenancy with the three original grantees: Minnie Giles, John V. Sheridan, and Helen M. Sheridan. Under established precedent (citing Hoover v. Haller), when a conveyance is silent as to interest, the presumption is equal interests. However, an act by one joint tenant inconsistent with joint tenancy, such as a conveyance inter vivos, destroys the right of survivorship and severs the joint tenancy (citing DeForge v. Patrick). When one of three or more joint tenants conveys their interest to a third person, the latter becomes a tenant in common with the others, but the original joint tenants remain joint tenants as between themselves (citing Tiffany, Real Property; Thompson on Real Property; Am. Jur. 2d). Therefore, Minnie Giles's conveyance to Harley Giles severed the joint tenancy as to her interest, converting her interest and Harley Giles's interest into a tenancy in common with John V. Sheridan and Helen M. Sheridan, but John V. Sheridan and Helen M. Sheridan remained joint tenants as between themselves. Regarding the mortgage, the deed explicitly stated that all grantees "assume and agree to pay" the existing mortgage, making it a joint obligation. A co-tenant who pays off an encumbrance on the common estate does so for the common benefit and is entitled to contribution from co-debtors (citing Carson v. Broady, Oliver v. Lansing, Exchange Elevator Co. v. Marshall). The defendant failed to prove any agreement that would negate their obligation to contribute to the mortgage payment. Therefore, Minnie Giles was entitled to contribution from her co-tenants for the mortgage she paid.
Analysis:
This case clarifies the complex dynamics of joint tenancy severance, particularly when multiple joint tenants are involved. It establishes that a conveyance by one of three or more joint tenants does not necessarily destroy the joint tenancy for all parties but can create a hybrid ownership structure where the severing tenant becomes a tenant in common with the others, while the remaining original joint tenants maintain their joint tenancy status. Furthermore, the decision reinforces the principle that explicit language in a deed regarding debt assumption imposes a joint obligation, entitling a co-tenant who pays more than their share to contribution from the others. This provides valuable guidance for property owners and legal practitioners regarding the implications of conveying interests and financial responsibilities within co-tenancies.
