Summary
The Alabama Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment reforming a deed that mistakenly included a 20-acre homestead in a gift conveyance to the grantors’ son. The court held that equity may reform a voluntary deed based on a unilateral mistake by the grantors when clear and convincing evidence establishes the mistake and the grantors’ intended conveyance. The court also held that the parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of intent in such a reformation action.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether a deed conveying property as a gift may be reformed when the grantors made a unilateral mistake in the legal description.
- Whether the parol evidence rule bars evidence of the grantors' intent in an action to reform a deed based on unilateral mistake.
- Whether the evidence established a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment.
- Whether the trial court improperly based reformation on unconscionability.
Holdings
- When a grantor seeks to reform a voluntary deed given as a gift, equity may reform the deed upon clear and convincing proof of the grantor's unilateral mistake and intended conveyance; mutuality of mistake is not required.
- The parol evidence rule does not bar evidence of the grantor's intent that contradicts the plain meaning of a deed when the grantor seeks reformation of a voluntary conveyance for unilateral mistake.
- Summary judgment was proper because the evidence conclusively established that the grantors did not intend to convey the 20-acre homestead and Wesley's affidavits did not create a genuine issue of material fact.
- The trial court did not reversibly err by using the word 'unconscionable' because, read in context, the order referred to equitable relief through reformation rather than holding the deed unenforceable as an unconscionable contract.
Key quotations
“Based on our case-law, and the support from other jurisdictions cited above, we now hold that where a grantor seeks to reform a deed based on a unilateral mistake and that deed was voluntary, equity will act to reform the deed.” (at 759)
“Now that we have held that a court can reform a deed that has been given to a grantee as a gift upon a showing that the grantor made a unilateral mistake, we see no impediment in allowing evidence of the grantor’s intention that contradicts the plain meaning of the text” (at 760)
Factual background
John Pullum owned 160 acres in Geneva County and, with his wife Peggy, intended to retain the 20-acre parcel containing their homestead. A deed conveying 80 acres to their son Wesley mistakenly included the 20 acres because the legal assistant failed to omit it from the description. John and Peggy later executed and recorded a corrective deed excluding the homestead, and evidence from the attorney's former legal assistant established the grantors' intent and the clerical nature of the error. Wesley's opposing affidavits did not contradict that evidence.
Procedural history
John and Peggy Pullum executed a deed conveying 80 acres to Wesley, but the deed's legal description mistakenly included the 20 acres containing their homestead. They later executed and recorded a corrective deed excluding the homestead. Wesley filed a quiet-title petition, Peggy sought reformation, and Kelly's estate sought reformation and faced a compensation claim. The trial court granted summary judgment to Peggy and Kelly's estate, concluding that the inclusion of the 20 acres was a scrivener's error and that the grantors did not intend to convey the homestead. The Supreme Court of Alabama affirmed.