Williams v. Cole
1988 WL 128785, 1988 Mo. App. LEXIS 1662, 760 S.W.2d 944 (1988)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
When an unrecorded deed is found in the grantor's possession at the time of death, a presumption of non-delivery arises. To overcome this presumption, the grantee must show that the grantor intended to relinquish all dominion and control over the deed and make it presently operative as a conveyance, which is not satisfied by the grantor's mere offer to transfer the deed when the grantee refuses to accept physical possession.
Facts:
- Johnnie Wesley Clemons owned a one-acre property with a house.
- Clemons executed a deed conveying the property to Terry Cole, the nephew of his late wife.
- On several occasions, Clemons told Cole that he had prepared the deed and offered to give it to him for recording.
- Cole repeatedly refused to take physical possession of the deed, telling Clemons to keep it for safekeeping, partly to avoid upsetting other family members.
- Clemons retained the unrecorded deed in a box in his house and continued to exercise all incidents of ownership over the property.
- Clemons died intestate on August 28, 1986.
- After Clemons' death, his sister, Lula Williams, discovered the deed in the box at his home.
Procedural Posture:
- Lula Williams and other heirs of Johnnie Clemons sued Terry Cole in the Circuit Court of Wright County, Missouri (trial court).
- The plaintiffs sought to set aside a deed from Clemons to Cole on the ground that it was never legally delivered.
- The trial court entered a judgment in favor of the defendant, Cole, upholding the validity of the deed.
- The plaintiffs appealed the trial court's judgment to the Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a grantor's repeated offer to give a deed to a grantee, which the grantee refuses to physically accept, constitute a legally effective delivery sufficient to overcome the presumption of non-delivery when the unrecorded deed is found in the grantor's possession after his death?
Opinions:
Majority - Per Curiam
No. A legally effective delivery did not occur because the grantor never relinquished dominion and control over the deed. The undisputed fact that the deed was unrecorded and in the grantor's possession at his death creates a strong presumption of non-delivery, shifting the burden of proof to the grantee, Cole. The vital inquiry for delivery is whether the grantor intended a complete transfer by parting with all dominion over the instrument. Here, despite the grantor's offers, he never parted with the deed. He never showed it to the grantee, nor did he place it with a third party for delivery. Because the grantee refused to take the deed, the grantor retained possession and control until his death, meaning the evidence was insufficient to rebut the presumption of non-delivery.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the high evidentiary bar required to overcome the presumption of non-delivery when a deed is found with the grantor after death. It clarifies that a grantor's subjective intent to convey property is insufficient without an objective act of relinquishing control over the instrument. The case serves as a strong precedent that a grantee's refusal to accept physical possession, even for well-intentioned reasons, can be fatal to the validity of the conveyance, as it prevents the grantor from completing the final, necessary act of delivery. Future legal analyses in similar cases will focus heavily on whether the grantor's actions, not just their words or intentions, demonstrated a complete and unconditional parting of dominion over the deed.
