Case ID: ky_211/html/0209-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Drury, Commissioner", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

McCoy, et al. v. Mud Lick Coal Company.
    (Decided November 13, 1925.)
    Appeal from Pike Circuit Court..
    1. Guardian and Ward — Defects in Mining Leases Given by Infant and His Guardian Held Cured by Ratification After Maturity.— Defects in mining lease given by infant, and subsequent lease made by guardian under authority of Kentucky Statutes, sections 2031a-l, 2031a-6, for 45 years, in alleged violation of section 2031a-2, held cured by infant’s signature and acknowledgment of paper ratifying and confirming such leases after he became of age. •
    2. Vendor and Purchaser — Title of Purchasers of Land Held Subject to Prior Rights of Lessee to Erect Buildings and Dump Refuse on Premises. — Purchasers of land from infant, after mining leases executed by latter and his guardian and subsequently ratified by former were recorded, were charged with notice of their contents, and took title subject to lessees’ prior rights thereunder to' erect houses and buildings and dump refuse on premises.
    3. Quieting Title — Right of Purchasers of Land to Royalties on Coal Mined by Lessees Not Considered in Action Against Latter to Quiet Title. — Whether purchasers of land, after mining leases given by vendor were recorded, are entitled to share of royalties for coal mined by lessee cannot be considered in their action against lessees to quiet title; that being question between them and vendor.
    J. C. CANTRELL and G. R. BLACKBURN, JR., for appellants.
    MOORE & CHILDERS for appellee.
   Opinion op the Court by

Drury, Commissioner

Affirming.

■The appellants, whom we will call plaintiffs, began this action against the appellee and W. M. York, to remove an alleged clond from their title. They were unsuccessful in the trial court and have appealed. By deed dated February 2, 1924, and of record in deed book 75, page 230, in the office of the clerk of the Pike county court, LeBoy Bunyon, then 'an infant, acquired title to a tract of land which it appears contains twenty-seven acres. On May 3, 1917, LeBoy Bunyon — while an infant —gave a very elaborate coal and mining lease to> W. M. York. In the descriptive part of this lease, the premises are described as acquired under deed dated February 2, 1914, and of record in deed book 75, at page 230, in the Pike county clerk’s office, though stated to contain 21.44 acres. This lease was on November 24, 1917, recorded in Pike county, deed book 91, at page 280, and this lease was by York transferred to the Mud Lick Coal Company.

On April 1,1918, Dr. John B. Maynard, as guardian of LeBoy Bunyon, gave a still more elaborate lease on these premises to the Mud Lick Coal Company, the premises being again described by reference to the deed by which title was acquired, and to its date, and the book and page where it is recorded; but in this deed the premises were stated to contain forty acres, more or less. This lease was recorded in Pike county, deed book 92, page 101, on April 3, 1918. The lease was made under the authority of chapter 116 of the laws of Kentucky for 1918, same being now section 2031a-l-6 of the statutes. Dr. Maynard undertook to make a lease for forty-five years. It is insisted that because of ¡section 2031a-2, this was an effort on his part to make a lease beyond the time when the infancy of LeBoy Bunyon would be at an end, and that therefore the lease was void. However, on October 6, 3918, LeBoy Bunyon became of age and on the next day he signed and acknowledged a paper ratifying and confirming these two leases and referring to the books and pages where they are recorded, and this ratification was on October 15, 1918, duly recorded in Pike county deed book 94 at page 198. When LeBoy Bunyon signed and acknowledged this paper containing reference to these two leases, the one executed by him when an infant, and the one executed by his guardian, the effect was the same as if those two leases had been written out at length in the article which he then signed and which was subsequently recorded.

Among the rights which the Mud Lick Coal Company acquired by these leases was the right to- erect houses and buildings on the premises, and to dump on the premises refuse produced in their mining operations. On April 15, 1918, the plaintiffs bought from LeBoy Bunyon six acres of the level part of this land. Soon the Mud Lick Coal Company started to- erect a bam on a portion of this level land, to which the plaintiffs objected and this suit resulted. The trial court properly sustained the Mud Lick Company in the enjoyment of its rights given it under these leases, as the paper executed on October 7, 1918, cured all defects in the two previous leases. These three instruments were of record at the time the plaintiffs made their purchase, and the plaintiffs were charged with notice of their contents. They bought from Bunyon with those records before them, and necessarily took title to their premises, subject to these prior and therefore superior rights of the Mud Lick Coal Company. Even a perfunctory examination of the records when they bought from Bunyon, would have disclosed.to plaintiffs all that Bunyon had the right to sell them. The plaintiffs are -also contending that they are entitled to 6/27 -of the royalties for the coal mined from this twenty-seven acres, but that is a question between the plaintiffs and LeBoy Bunyon, and is not before us. now.

The judgment of the trial court being in accord with this opinion, it is affirmed. :