Parole (Extrinsic) Evidence

Top  Previous  Next

Parole (Extrinsic) Evidence

 

 On non-tax matters, Alabama admits parol testimony to cure some description defects.  In Alabama, a deed describing property only by lot number is not void for uncertainty if the land may be identified by the grantor's ownership and possession of the only parcel answering that description and by placing the purchaser in possession of the intended parcel. Karter v. East, 220 Ala. 511, 125 So. 655 (1930).

 An omission of part of the boundaries or calls is not fatal to the validity of a deed, where they can be supplied or the description be rendered certain. McArthur v. Terrell, 276 Ala. 440, 163 So.2d 600 (1964).  The McArthur court held, “[t]here seems to be no question that where the description is merely indefinite that parol evidence can be resorted to in order to show what land was intended to be conveyed.” Id., 276 Ala. at 440, 163 So.2d at 601.

 Parol evidence may be used to clarify a description using a well known name for a tract. Eufaula Nat. Bank v. Pruett, 128 Ala. 470, 30 So. 731 (1901).  An omission of the range, township, and section numbers can be cured by parol proof that the grantors were the grantee's parents,  that at the time of the conveyance they lived on the land, and that the parents owned no other land. Scott v. McDonald, 249 Ala. 464, 31 So.2d 351 (1947).

Copyright 2011 by Edward G, Hawkins. All rights reserved.