Johnson v. Butler, 206 Okla. 632

Summary

The Oklahoma Supreme Court held that accretions attached to land pass with a conveyance of the land unless specifically reserved or excepted. Because the deeds in the plaintiff's chain of title were plain and unambiguous, the trial court improperly admitted oral evidence of the parties' intent, and the defendant's earlier deed was void because the property was restricted against alienation. The judgment was reversed with directions to enter judgment for the plaintiff.

Holdings

1. Accretions that have attached to and become part of land pass with a conveyance of that land unless they are specifically excepted or reserved.
2. When a deed is plain and unambiguous and there is no allegation of fraud, accident, or mistake, the parties' intent is determined from the language of the written instrument alone; prior oral negotiations or expressions of intent may not vary the deed.
3. A deed by the allottee conveying restricted Indian homestead land while the land is subject to restrictions against alienation is absolutely void and conveys no right or title.

Questions Presented

1. Whether accretions attached to land pass with a conveyance of the land unless specifically excepted or reserved.
2. Whether oral evidence of the parties' prior negotiations, statements, and intentions may vary the terms of plain and unambiguous deeds absent fraud, accident, mistake, or absurdity.
3. Whether Butler acquired any title or right under a deed from a restricted Indian allottee while the land was subject to restrictions against alienation.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded