Opinion ID: 1640933
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: whether rowetts claims are barred by marketable record title and the principle of equitable estoppel?

Text: It is insisted that the Rowetts are estopped by marketable record title from asserting their claim to the home place. In addition to McFarland's claim that paragraph seven of Hanks' will was ambiguous and therefore the presumption of vesting applied, they also raised the defenses of marketable record title pursuant to SDCL Ch. 43-30, and equitable estoppel. The trial court's decision encompassed only the ambiguity claim and held that Hanks' will was ambiguous, thus invoking the presumption of vesting, thereby vesting the remainder interest in the home place in Harvey Hanks and Frances Rowett as of the death of their father, Ewell Hanks. The trial court having so decided, did not reach nor rule on McFarland's claims under the Marketable Title Act, nor equitable estoppel. Although McFarlands raised both the marketable record title and equitable estoppel issues before the circuit court, [8] they have not complied with the notice of review requirements set forth in SDCL 15-26A-22. [9] Noncompliance with this statute's requirements for notice of review results in a waiver of the issues, and this court will not consider them. Gratzfeld v. Bomgaars Supply, 391 N.W.2d 200, 202 (S.D.1986). See also: State v. Holland, 346 N.W.2d 302, 306 (S.D.1984); Application of Northwestern Bell Telephone Company, 326 N.W.2d 100, 104 (S.D.1982). In light of our reversal of the trial court on the only issue decided by it, and considering the equities involved in this case as well as the Rowetts' failure to assert their claim in a more timely fashion, we remand to the circuit court for trial upon the issues of marketable record title and equitable estoppel.