Case Name: Carl SEVERSON, C. R. Cole, Oscar Knutson, William M. Moo, M. J. Sigfried, formerly M. J. Larson, Geneva Lilleskov Schenk, Eleanor Lilleskov Gallagher, Bernice Taylor, Russell Lagerberg and Eugene Lagerberg, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Lawrence A. SIMON, Nettie M. Simon, Hazel E. Kyle, Raymond L. Simon, Norman M. Nelson, Gus O. Nelson, LeRoy Nelson, Beatrice Nelson Odegard, LeRoy Nelson, as general guardian of Allen L. Nelson, Wade G. Nelson, and Louise Marie Nelson, minors, DeMaris Simon, DeMaris Simon, as general guardian of Ronald V. Simon, Alma Mae Osborne, Bonnie Jean Krause, Lilliam C. Simon, John A. Simon, Neva Simon Cornell, Mabel Simon North, O. B. Simon, Ida Olson, Williams County, North Dakota, a public corporation, and all other persons unknown claiming any estate or interest in or lien or encumbrance upon the property described in the Complaint, Defendants and Respondents
Court: North Dakota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: North Dakota
Decision Date: 1961-08-10
Citations: 110 N.W.2d 289
Docket Number: No. 7870
Parties: Carl SEVERSON, C. R. Cole, Oscar Knutson, William M. Moo, M. J. Sigfried, formerly M. J. Larson, Geneva Lilleskov Schenk, Eleanor Lilleskov Gallagher, Bernice Taylor, Russell Lagerberg and Eugene Lagerberg, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Lawrence A. SIMON, Nettie M. Simon, Hazel E. Kyle, Raymond L. Simon, Norman M. Nelson, Gus O. Nelson, LeRoy Nelson, Beatrice Nelson Odegard, LeRoy Nelson, as general guardian of Allen L. Nelson, Wade G. Nelson, and Louise Marie Nelson, minors, DeMaris Simon, DeMaris Simon, as general guardian of Ronald V. Simon, Alma Mae Osborne, Bonnie Jean Krause, Lilliam C. Simon, John A. Simon, Neva Simon Cornell, Mabel Simon North, O. B. Simon, Ida Olson, Williams County, North Dakota, a public corporation, and all other persons unknown claiming any estate or interest in or lien or encumbrance upon the property described in the Complaint, Defendants and Respondents.
Judges: STRUTZ, MORRIS and TEIGEN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: North Western Reporter 2d
Volume: 110
Pages: 289–292

Head Matter:
Carl SEVERSON, C. R. Cole, Oscar Knutson, William M. Moo, M. J. Sigfried, formerly M. J. Larson, Geneva Lilleskov Schenk, Eleanor Lilleskov Gallagher, Bernice Taylor, Russell Lagerberg and Eugene Lagerberg, Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. Lawrence A. SIMON, Nettie M. Simon, Hazel E. Kyle, Raymond L. Simon, Norman M. Nelson, Gus O. Nelson, LeRoy Nelson, Beatrice Nelson Odegard, LeRoy Nelson, as general guardian of Allen L. Nelson, Wade G. Nelson, and Louise Marie Nelson, minors, DeMaris Simon, DeMaris Simon, as general guardian of Ronald V. Simon, Alma Mae Osborne, Bonnie Jean Krause, Lilliam C. Simon, John A. Simon, Neva Simon Cornell, Mabel Simon North, O. B. Simon, Ida Olson, Williams County, North Dakota, a public corporation, and all other persons unknown claiming any estate or interest in or lien or encumbrance upon the property described in the Complaint, Defendants and Respondents.
No. 7870.
Supreme Court of North Dakota.
Aug. 10, 1961.
Bjella, Jestrab & Neff, Williston, for plaintiffs and appellants.
Ilvedson, Pringle, Herigstad & Meschke, Minot, for defendants and respondents.

Opinion:
SATHRE, Chief Justice.
The plaintiffs brought this action to quiet title to the North one-half of the Northwest quarter of Section Thirty-three, Township One Hundred Fifty-five, Range Ninety-three., Williams County, North Dakota. The complaint is in the statutory form. The defendant who answered, DeMaris Simon, claims title by adverse possession, payment of taxes for more than ten years, and laches on the part of the plaintiffs in bringing the action.
The case was tried in the District Court of Williams County. Judgment was entered in favor of the defendants and the plaintiffs appealed.
The facts are substantially as follows: On March 11, 1929, N. W. Simon and his wife executed a quitclaim deed to the above described land of which N. W. Simon was the record owner, to himself and nine others. It was the purpose of these parties to speculate in oil, and they all contributed equal amounts of money, which, together with the quitclaim deed was delivered to William Larson whose wife was one of the grantees in the quitclaim deed. Larson was to be the clerk, pay the taxes and take care of the land. Larson never had the deed recorded and paid no taxes on the land.
N. W. Simon died in November 1933.
On March 1, 1940, Williams County took tax deed to the land for non-payment of taxes. The deed to the county was filed for record March 20, 1940.
On February 13, 1946, Clarence Simon, son of the record title' owner N. W. Simon, repurchased the land from Williams County under Section 57-28-19 NDCC which permits members of the family of the taxpayer to repurchase land forfeited to the county. During the same year Clarence Simon broke ten acres of the land and farmed the ten acres continually thereafter, and listed it in his record as his property. He paid the taxes as they came due until his death in February 1953. After his death his widow, DeMaris Simon, paid the taxes and continued in possession of the land.
The plaintiffs are the successors in interest of some of the grantees in the deed executed by N. W. Simon on March 11, 1929. The defendants who answered are the widow of Clarence Simon for herself and as guardian of her minor son, Ronald V. Simon.
The plaintiffs brought the action to quiet title in them to the land. They claim that the land is impressed with a trust for the benefit of the grantees in the deed executed by N. W. Simon on March 11, 1929, and that the defendants held the land as trustees for said grantees. The defendant De-Maris Simon claims title through deed from Williams County to N. W. Simon, dated April 30, 1928; through judgment in an action to quiet title brought by N. W. Simon in August 1928; through deed from Williams County to Clarence Simon, her husband, dated February 13, 1946; through adverse possession and payment of taxes for more than ten years; and through final decree of distribution in the estate of Clarence Simon, deceased, of the county court of Williams County, dated September 15, 1954, vesting in the defendants DeMaris Simon, the widow of Clarence Simon, deceased, and in Donald Vern Simon, minor son of said Clarence Simon, deceased, each a one-half interest in the land involved herein.
There is no evidence in the record before us that when Clarence Simon repurchased the land he had any knowledge of the unrecorded deed executed by his father, N. W. Simon, March 11, 1929. •
The records of Williams County showed that when Clarence Simon bought the land in February 1946, the county had acquired title through tax deed proceedings for nonpayment of taxes by the owner, N. W. Simon, father of Clarence Simon.
The record shows further that Clarence Simon purchased this land at the suggestion of the county auditor of Williams County. The auditor knew that N. W. Simon was the record title owner and that the county had acquired the land through tax deed proceedings, and he evidently knew that Clarence Simon was a son of N. W. Simon. The record clearly shows that Clarence Simon was not aware of any confidential relation between his father N. W. Simon and the other nine grantees in the unrecorded quitclaim deed executed by N. W. Simon in 1929. More than seventeen years had elapsed since that deed was executed when Clarence Simon purchased the land from the county. Clarence Simon knew nothing of the quitclaim deed until 1951, when Warren Larson, son of William Larson, deceased, to whom the quitclaim deed had been delivered, told Clarence Simon that he, Warren, had found the deed among his father's papers. The plaintiffs did not bring this action until October 1957, more than twenty-eight years after the execution by N. W. Simon of the unrecorded quitclaim deed referred to herein. It is clearly established by the record that when this action was commenced Clarence Simon, during his lifetime, and after his death his widow, had been in the open, adverse and continuous possession of the land involved for more than ten years, and during all that time had paid the taxes legally levied against it.
The evidence wholly fails to establish that possession of the land by Clarence Simon was impressed with a constructive trust for the benefit of the plaintiffs. In order to establish a constructive trust in real property the evidence must be clear, convincing and satisfactory, and of such character as to leave in the mind of the court no hesitation or substantial doubt. Carter v. Carter, 14 N.D. 66, 103 N.W. 425; Bernauer v. McCaull-Webster Elevator Co., 41 N.D. 561, 171 N.W. 282.
The defendant DeMaris Simon, surviving widow of Clarence Simon, for herself and as general guardian of her minor son, Ronald V. Simon, claims title and ownership of the land involved by adverse possession and payment of taxes thereon for more than ten years under Section 47-06-03 NDCC, which is as follows:
"A title to real property, vested in any person who has been or hereafter shall be, either alone or including those under whom he claims, in the actual open adverse and undisputed possession of the land under such title for a period of ten years and who, either alone or including those under whom he claims, shall have paid all taxes and assessments legally levied thereon, shall be valid in law. Possession by a county under tax deed shall not be deemed adverse. A contract for deed shall constitute color of title within the meaning of this section [and] from and after the execution of such contract."
It is clearly established' by the evidence that Clarence Simon during his lifetime, and after his death, his widow, De-Maris Simon, were in open, undisputed and adverse possession of the land involved for more than ten years under color of title, and during all that time paid the taxes legally levied thereon. Since there is a failure of proof that possession of the land involved, by Clarence Simon, and after his death by his widow, DeMaris Simon, was impressed with a constructive trust, it follows that the defendant DeMaris Simon individually and as guardian of her minor son has acquired title by adverse possession and payment of taxes for ten years under Section 47-06-03 NDCC.
The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
STRUTZ, MORRIS and TEIGEN, JJ., concur.