Case ID: miss_59/html/0558-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Campbell, C. J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

J. D. Stewart et al. v. W. C. Cage et al.
    Deed. Description. Certainty.
    
    A conveyance of the grantor’s “ undivided interest in the estate both real and personal,” of a deceased person late of a stated county, is not void for uncertainty of description.
    Appeal from the Chancery Court of Wilkinson County.
    Hon. H. S. Van Eaton, Chancellor.
    Children of a deceased heir of William Stewart, late of Wilkinson County, Mississippi, the appellees, who were omitted from a bill filed by the appellants, his other heirs, for partition of his land, successfully petitioned to be made-parties, on the ground that the deed of their parents, Charles C. and Catherine J. Cage, executed Feb. 22, 1839, by which their interest was supposed to pass to other heirs, was void, because it used the description, “ all our and each of our right, title, interest, estate, claim and demand both at law and in equity of, in, and to our undivided interest in the estate both real and personal of William Stewart, deceased, late of said Wilkinson County.”
    
      Frank Johnston and O. P. Neilson, for the appellants.
    The description is sufficiently certain. Peacher v. Strauss, 47 Miss. 353 ; Bowers v. Andrews, 52 Miss. 596; Wasson v. Connor, 54 Miss. 351; Worthington v. Hylyer, 4 Mass. 196; Hatch v. Hatch, 2 Hayw. 32; Doolittle v. Blalcesley, 4 Day, 265 ; Sanford v. Bailees, 1 Meriv. 646.
    
      D. C. Bramlett, for the appellees.
    The deed is void, because the land is not identified by location or otherwise. Murphy v. Hendricks, 57 Ind. 593; Barnett v. Nichols, 56 Miss. 622.
   Campbell, C. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The deed was not void for uncertainty.

Reversed and remanded.