Before Bridges, C.j., Herring, And Southwick, JJ.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Southwick, J., For The Court:
Odom v. Walley et al, 96-CA-00675, __ So. 2d __
THIS OPINION IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION AND MAY NOT BE CITED, PURSUANT TO M.R.A.P. 35-B
TRIAL JUDGE: HON. FRANKLIN C. MCKENZIE JR.
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED: JONES COUNTY CHANCERY COURT
NATURE OF THE CASE: CIVIL - REAL PROPERTY
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION: BOUNDARY ESTABLISHED
DISPOSITION REVERSED AND REMANDED - 07/14/1998
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
Plaintiffs Daniel R. Walley and Jo Nell Walley sought to resolve real property boundary disputes with William S. Odom and with three other people. Without a hearing being held and without the consent of the appellant Odom, a judgment was entered by the chancellor approving the boundaries shown in a survey that the parties had agreed to have prepared. We agree that without Odom's consent the judgment was invalid. We reverse and remand.
In 1979 the 49.1 acre property in question was partited by court order into seven parcels. The order recited a legal description for each parcel. On July 23, 1992, Daniel R. Walley and Jo Nell Walley filed a complaint to remove a cloud and to quiet title on the same property. Named as defendants were the appellant William S. Odom, and also Bonnie Lou Odom, Donnie Odom Geddie, and Harold R. Geddie. The plaintiffs had purchased three of the seven parcels after the partition. Harold R. Geddie and his wife, Donnie Odom Geddie, were subsequent owners of two of the seven parcels, and the Odom's were the owners of the remaining two parcels.
Mr. and Mrs. Odom answered by denying that there were any errors in the original legal descriptions of the seven parcels. In the alternative the Odom's alleged that they owned any disputed lands by adverse possession. Donnie Odom Geddie and Harold R. Geddie file a similar answer.
The record reveals no further action in this suit for over two years. Finally, on March 3, 1995, the Walley plaintiffs filed a motion for a hearing, in which they requested a trial date since the parties were unable to agree on a date for trial. This motion was noticed for ...