J. C. EDWARDS, AND MAY EDWARDS, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
ADA CAHOON, W. D. CAHOON, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision quieting title, upholding the sufficiency of color of title instruments and the finding of adverse possession.
Yes, the instruments were sufficient as color of title. Yes, the evidence was sufficient to establish adverse possession for the statutory period.
“There are but two questions for us to determine.”
Identifies the core legal questions before the court.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellees sued to quiet title, claiming ownership through paramount record title and adverse possession under color of title. Appellants were made par…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Color Of Title cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellees brought suit to quiet title making appellants parties defendant. The record discloses that appellees and appellants each deraigned title from a common source. The appellees relied upon paramount record title as to a part of the land involved and relied upon adverse poss'ession under color of title as to all of the property involved. There are but two questions for us to determine. They are:
First, whether or not the written instruments relied upon by the complainants in the court below as constituting color of title are sufficient to serve that purpose. The court below held that they were sufficient. We find in the record no good reason to reverse that holding.
The second question is, assuming that the paper writings relied upon as constituting color of title were sufficient for that purpose, then, was the evidence sufficient to establish the fact that the complainants had exercised adverse possession of the property for the statutory period required to establish fee simple title by adverse possession held under color of title. It may be said that the evidence is conflicting but the record discloses substantial evidence to warrant the finding of the chancellor. Therefore, his findings will not be disturbed.
The decree should be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Brown and Bu-foed, J. J.,‘concur.