Court Opinion

ID: 9864570
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-25 14:02:53.346343+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:18:20.019674
License: Public Domain

THE COURT.
In response to appellant’s petition for rehearing, we deem it sufficient to say that there is in the record *246no more evidence of mistake than of fraud. We cannot assume that because the grantor was occupying the property he did not intend to convey it to the grantee. That would' be a dangerous and unauthorized principle of construction to apply to an instrument that is presumed to express the intention of the parties. In the absence of a clear showing that he intended otherwise, one must, of course, be held to the plain meaning of the words he uses in the conveyance of real property.
The petition for rehearing is denied.