Opinion
Gen. No. 9,593.
Opinion filed August 9, 1948. Released for publication September 7, 1948.
1. DEEDS OF CONVEYANCE, § 48 — crops included in deed to farm. A warranty deed conveying a farm carried with it the growing crops where there was no reservation of them in the deed.
See Callaghan's Illinois Digest, same topic and section number.
2. DEEDS OF CONVEYANCE, § 107fn_ — parol reservation of crops. Alleged parol reservation of crops at time of conveyance of farm by warranty deed containing no reservation as to crops would be inconsistent with deed, and evidence concerning such reservation would be inadmissible in tenant's action against grantees for alleged conversion of crops.
3. HUSBAND AND WIFE, § 126fn_ — joinder of husband as conveying his interest in crops. Where husband, occupying farm as tenant, joined with his wife as a grantor in warranty deed conveying farm without reservation as to growing crops, the deed conveyed husband's interest in crops notwithstanding husband's contention that his joining in deed was for sole purpose of releasing his dower and homestead interest.
4. CONVERSION, § 28fn_ — grantees' liability for refusal to permit tenant to harvest crops. Where tenant, under lease expiring February 28, 1944, and containing no provision for harvesting crops after expiration of lease, planted rye and wheat in fall of 1943, to mature in summer of 1944, and on November 1, 1943, tenant joined with his wife as a grantor in a deed conveying farm to defendants and containing no reservation of crops, and tenant moved from farm on March 1, 1941, defendants' refusal to permit tenant to harvest wheat and rye did not reader defendants liable to tenant for conversion of such crops.
Appeal by defendants from the County Court of Morgan county; the Hon. PAUL FENSTERMAKER, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court in vacation after May term, 1948. Reversed. Judgment entered herein. Opinion filed August 9, 1948. Released for publication September 7, 1948.
HARRY G. STORY and EDWARD J. FLYNN, both of Jacksonville, for appellants.
WILSON WRIGHT, of Jacksonville, for appellee.
In this case, plaintiff appellee recovered a judgment for $774.93 against defendants appellants, after trial before the court without a jury, as damages for an alleged conversion of certain crops.
It appears that plaintiff had been a tenant on the farm in question under a written lease expiring February 28, 1944, containing no provision for harvesting crops after the expiration of the lease. In October 1943, he planted certain acreage in rye and wheat, to mature in the summer of 1944. On November 1, 1943, certain grantors, including Maude N. Butcher and her husband, Francis A. Butcher, the plaintiff, conveyed by warranty deed the farm in question to defendants, Albert May and Freda J. May, which deed contained no reservation as to crops. On March 1, 1944, plaintiff moved from the premises and was denied, by defendants, the right to harvest the wheat and rye crops which matured in June 1944, which crops were in fact possessed and used by defendants, or one of them. This action followed, and defendants appeal from the judgment of the county court.
The first question presented is whether or not this conveyance of real estate carried with it the growing crops. The law is well settled that it does, where there is no reservation in the deed. ( Firebaugh v. Divan, 207 Ill. 287; Damery v. Ferguson, 48 Ill. App. 224; Carter v. Wingard, 47 Ill. App. 296.)
It is next contended by plaintiff that there was a parol reservation of the crops at the time of the real estate transaction. Any such reservation would be inconsistent with the deed, and evidence concerning the same would be inadmissible. ( Damery v. Ferguson, supra; Smith v. Price, 39 Ill. 28; Powell v. Rich, 41 Ill. 466.)
Plaintiff further contends that his wife was the owner in fee of a part interest in the farm and that his joining therein was for the sole purpose of releasing his dower and homestead interest. Therefore, he argues, the deed would not pass his title in the growing crops. The case of Union Central Life Ins. Co. of Cincinnati, Ohio v. Cooper, 349 Ill. 256, conclusively settles this point and holds that where a wife appears as one of the grantors in a deed, she will be held to have conveyed whatever interest she had at such time.
The judgment of the county court of Morgan county is reversed and judgment entered herein in favor of defendants appellants for costs.
Reversed. Judgment entered herein.