V. B. GRIGG AND MARY B. GRIGG, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
KATHERINE GATT 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.
In this quiet title action, the Griggs sought to establish title to property they acquired through a chain of deeds originating from Katherine Gatt, a mentally incompetent person. The court affirmed the lower court's judgment in favor of the Harts, whose title derived from a deed executed by Gatt's court-appointed guardian, holding that Gatt's deed to the Griggs' predecessors was void and the Griggs had notice of her incompetency.
The court held that the deed from the incompetent Katherine Gatt conveyed no valid title, and that the Harts' title, derived from Gatt's court-appointed guardian, was valid and superior. The Griggs' notice of Gatt's incompetency rendered their title voidable.
[1] A deed executed by an owner of unsound mind conveys no title.
[2] A deed from an incompetent grantor is voidable if the grantee had knowledge of the grantor's insanity.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The law of this jurisdiction has long been that a deed purporting to convey lands which is executed by an owner of unsound mind conveys no title.”
Establishes the fundamental principle that deeds executed by mentally incompetent persons are void.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKatherine Gatt, an adjudicated incompetent, deeded property to Jirah Buck on April 22, 1964 (recorded April 27, 1964). Two days later, Buck and his wi…
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 Voidable Deed cases and more on FLexlaw
SPECTOR, Judge.
Appellants seek reversal of an adverse final judgment in a quiet title action filed by them against appellees. The appellees, Clyde E. Hart and Victoria Hart, counterclaimed to quiet title to the subject property in them, and the lower court ruled in accordance with their prayer. The subject property was owned by one Katherine Gatt, an adjudicated incompetent. On April 22, 1964, she deeded the property to one Jirah Buck. That deed was recorded April 27, 1964. On April 24, 1964, two days after the deed from Gatt, Buck and his wife conveyed the property to the Griggs, appellants here. That deed was recorded May 13, 1964.
On June 19, 1964, one Burton Cronin, duly appointed guardian of Katherine Gatt, conveyed the subject property to the Harts by deed which was recorded June 30, 1964. On the same date, letters of guardianship issued in the State of Michigan naming Burton Cronin as guardian of Katherine Gatt was recorded in Volusia County.
In essence, the dispute between these parties centers upon the validity of the title to the subject property which inured to each as a result of their respective deeds. The appellees contend that since the trial court not only found that Katherine Gatt was in fact incompetent prior to execution by her of the deed to appellants’ predecessors in title, but also found that appellants were placed on notice that the disputed property was owned by a mentally incompetent person, the court was correct in holding that appellees’ title to the property was good since it derived from a valid deed. We agree and affirm.
The law of this jurisdiction has long been that a deed purporting to convey lands which is executed by an owner of unsound mind conveys no title. Crozier v. Ange, 85 Fla. 120, 95 So. 426. In Hassey v. Williams (1937), 127 Fla. 734, 174 So. 9, the court held that if a grantee under a deed from an incompetent had knowledge of the grantor’s insanity, the deed was voidable. In the case at bar, the court found on conflicting evidence that appellants had notice of Gatt’s incompetency.
In view of the findings of fact made by the” lower court and the applicable principles of law referred to above, the judgment reviewed herein must be
Affirmed.
RAWLS, C. J., and JOHNSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Hassey v. Williams, 127 Fla. 734 (Fla. 1937)
- Crozier v. Ange, 85 Fla. 120 (Fla. 1923)