Opinion ID: 1142497
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 9

Heading: was the chancellor in error in his interpretation of the 1949 and 1953 deeds as to any ownership conveyed by laura elizabeth greenlee?

Text: The chancellor found both the 1949 and 1953 deeds invalid and he did not attempt to interpret either of them in regard to the ownership conveyed by Laura Elizabeth Greenlee. From his decree it is safe to presume the chancellor found that no ownership was conveyed by Laura Elizabeth Greenlee via the invalid deeds. The chancellor found that the 1949 deed was invalid and should be set aside as a product of undue influence. Even had the deed been valid, Laura Greenlee owned no interest in the property in 1949 so she could convey none. The only consequence of Laura Greenlee's signature appearing on the 1949 deed would have been to validate W.H., Sr.'s conveyance of homestead property. Hendry v. Hendry, 300 So.2d 147, 148 (Miss. 1974). The chancellor found that the 1953 deed was invalid because Jewell Mitchell's name was forged and because there was no delivery of the deed by Jewell. A forged deed is absolutely void and ineffectual to pass title. Morgan v. Morgan, 431 So.2d 1119, 1120 (Miss. 1983). Additionally, there was no delivery of the deed by Laura Greenlee. See Newsom v. Newsom, 226 Miss. 303, 83 So.2d 802 (1955). Laura Elizabeth Greenlee, therefore, did not convey any ownership with the 1953 deed. There is substantial evidence to support the presumed findings of the chancellor and this Court will let them stand.