Shinn v. Shinn
Supreme Court of Arkansas
1Opinion of the Court
Darrell Hickman, Justice.
The question on appeal is whether the trial court was right in holding that the appellee, Mary Shinn, a widow, had an undivided one-fourth interest in land because she and her deceased husband held that interest by the entirety and not as tenants in common. We agree with the trial court and affirm the decree.
All we have is the face of the instrument itself. In such a case we are to find the intention of the grantor by examining the language used and putting ourselves as nearly as possible in the position of the parties to the deed. Gibson v. Pickett, 256 Ark. 1035,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Gibson v. PickettSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1974
- Hazen v. City of BoonevilleSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
- Wilson v. Lester Hurst Nursery, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1980
- Dennis v. DennisSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1922
- Foster v. SchmiedeskampSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1977
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cannco Contractors, Inc. v. LivingstonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1984
- Carrick v. CarrickCourt of Appeals of Arkansas · 1984
- Helm v. Mid-America Industries, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1991
- Enervest Operating, LLC v. Sebastian Mining, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012