Harmon v. Whitten

I respectfully dissent. The essence of the trial court’s holding is that the Vi mineral interest, conveyed by Leon Whitten to H. L. Whitten in 1975 after the partition suit was filed but before the partition sale, was rescinded either by the sale or by the 1976 instrument executed by Leon and H. L. Whitten after the partition sale, and that they, Leon and H. L., are estopped to deny that result. The majority adopts this rationale as being “substantially” correct from a legal standpoint and holds that Leon and H. L. “cannot now say that [their declaration in the 1976 instrument] was applicable…