Bailey v. Moten

The deed upon which the appellant relied in her quiet title suit did not convey an interest in the property in question, because the deed's description and the referenced plat included only her house and surrounding lot, not the adjacent property involved in this action.

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.

In this quiet title action, Josephine Bailey “Bailey” appeals the order of the superior court adopting the report of a Special Master and decreeing that fee simple title to a parcel of land in Coweta County is vested in Derether Moten. For the reasons that follow, we affirm. Bailey owns a house and lot in the City of Newnan to which she has record title. The property that is the subject of this quiet title action is located adjacent to and behind Bailey’s house and lot. The subject property is also adjacent to a house and lot to which Moten holds record title. Bailey’s petition to quiet title under OCGA § 23-3-60 et seq., asserted that she owned the subject property by deed, and alternatively, by prescription. “In an action to quiet title brought under OCGA § 23-3-60 et seq., the findings of the Special Master and adopted by the trial court will be upheld unless clearly erroneous. Therefore, if there is any evidence supporting the judgment of the trial court, it will not be disturbed.” Cernonok v. Kane , 280 Ga. 272, 273 1 627 SE2d 14 2006 Citations and punctuation omitted..

1. Bailey’s claim of ownership by deed is based upon a warranty deed dated December 17, 1974, from grantor Richard Beardon to grantee Matthew Bailey, who was her husband.1 But, this deed sets forth a metes and bounds description that corresponds to Bailey’s house and surrounding lot only; the description does not include the subject property. The deed also recites that the land conveyed “is more particularly identified by plat of property . . . dated December 12, 1974, of record in Plat Book 19, Page 103 . . . .” The referenced plat depicts a tract corresponding to the metes and bounds description; the plat designates the property containing Bailey’s house by solid lines and does not include the subject property therein. The plat also carries the notation that it is a portion of property recorded on an earlier plat.

Bailey v. Moten

The deed upon which the appellant relied in her quiet title suit did not convey an interest in the property in question, because the deed's description and the referenced plat included only her house and surrounding lot, not the adjacent property involved in this action.

Share with Email

Thank you for sharing!

Trending Stories

More From ALM

Subscribe to Daily Report