Dunlap v. Gipson

Schmucker, J., delivered the opinion of the Court. This is an appeal from a judgment against the appellant, as defendant, in an action brought by the appellee in the Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County. The declaration contains two counts. The first count avers that the defendant failed to have recorded among the land records of Anne Arundel County a deed from George Edwards to the plaintiff which the latter had left with him for that purpose and which he had promised to have so recorded, “whereby the plaintiff is deprived of his property.” The second count avers ¹²² that in March, 1902, the defendant without the knowledge or consent of the plaintiff procured to be recorded in said land records a deed from George Edwards to the plaintiff purporting to convey a certain parcel of land (“not describing or identifying it”) lying in the third election district of said county but that the deed “did not contain in its description the property that was intended to be conveyed” by said Edwards to the plaintiff and that both Edwards and the defendant were aware that the deed did not contain the property to be conveyed, “whereby the plaintiff has been deprived of his property.” To this narr. the defendant pleaded that he did not commit the wrong alleged.

At the trial of the case the plaintiff offered his own and other evidence tending to prove that in September, x 896, he had bought for $25 from one George Edwards, who had since then died, a piece of land containing a little over two acres in said third district lying in front of Edwards’ house and extending from the intersection of his private road with the Marley Neck Road up to Frank S. Revell’s land. That the land so. purchased by him had been measured off for him by the grant- or’s son Oliver and a surveyor named Mancha and that he had therefore entered upon and had ever since retained possession of it without any objection .from Edwards and that he1 had erected a house on it, and had also sunk a well on the part of it lying near Revell’s line. That having paid for the land he went with Edwards to the office of-the defendant, who was a Justice of the Peace, and attended to Edwards’ business, to have a deed drawn for the land, and that the defendant then gave him a receipt as follows : "Received October 3rd of Jacob Gipson a deed from George Edwards to the said Gipson for 2 acres of land more or less said deed to be recorded on- or before the 2nd of April, 1897.” There is no evidence that a deed for the land had in fact: been executed to the plaintiff when the receipt was given. On the contrary the plaintiff himself testified thát the defendant’ sometime afterwards told him that there was some trouble about his getting a deed on account of Edwards’ wife, but that the receipt he had given him was as good as a deed. ¹²³ The plaintiff further offered evidence tending to prove that in the summer of 1902, one Carter H. Colston had filled up the plaintiff’s well and had notified him not to trespass on his, Colston’s land.

That he then upon inquiry found out that in February, 1902, Edwards had, by a deed prepared by the defendant, sold for $100 to Colston, thirteen acres of land