Legal Opinion

Muehling v. Magee

Missouri Court of Appeals

Decided March 3, 1913Published

Appeal from Jasper County Circuit Court, Division Number Two. — Hon. David E. Blair, Judge. (1) Parol evidence is not admissible to construe, vary or contradict the terms of a deed. And where the owner of the land annexes a fixture to the freehold, it becomes a part of the realty; and unless the fixture is reserved in the deed, it will pass to his grantee as a part of the realty. Heitkamp v. Granite Co., 59 Mo.

Read the full summary

Appeal from Jasper County Circuit Court, Division Number Two. — Hon. David E. Blair, Judge. (1) Parol evidence is not admissible to construe, vary or contradict the terms of a deed. And where the owner of the land annexes a fixture to the freehold, it becomes a part of the realty; and unless the fixture is reserved in the deed, it will pass to his grantee as a part of the realty. Heitkamp v. Granite Co., 59 Mo. App. 251; State Security Bank v. Hoskins, 130 Iowa 339, 106 N. W. 764, 8 L. B. A. (N. S,) 376; Todd v. Monsees, 160 Mo. App. 310. (2) A parol sale or reservation of a fixture annexed…

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOE EEHEAEING-.

PEE CURIAM.

Counsel for appellant in their motion for rehearing evidently mistake the holding in our opinion. There is no question but that a deed to realty which does not reserve emblements or trade fixtures located thereon will pass title to the same to the grantee, and the grantor in the deed would be precluded from setting up an oral agreement under which he would claim that it was not intended by the parties that the emblements or trade fixtures were to pass, because this would be varying the terms of the deed. [Cantrell v. Crane, 161 Mo. App. 308, 143 S. W. 837.]…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Cantrell v. CraneMissouri Court of Appeals · 1912
  2. Turner v. MorrisMissouri Court of Appeals · 1910

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API