Logourl black
From our private database of 14,100+ case briefs...

Lott v. Muldoon Road Baptist Church, Inc.

Supreme Court of Alaska
466 P.2d 815 (1970)


Facts

In 1951, Leo Lott (plaintiff) moved to Alaska and married Burnie Garland. Lott purchased a 75-foot tract of property. In 1955, Lott and Garland were divorced, and as part of the settlement, Lott received an additional 60-foot tract of property adjacent to her initial parcel. As a result, Lott collectively owned a 135-foot tract of property. Garland retained a 195-foot adjacent parcel in the settlement. Lott left Alaska in 1955. While Lott was gone, Garland had a 270-foot portion of property, including 75 feet of Lott’s parcel, surveyed, platted, and divided into three lots. In 1958, Garland designated the platted land as a Homesite Park Subdivision and certified that he owned all the property in the plat. Garland then purported to convey the property to Title Insurance and Trust Company (Title Insurance) in connection with a loan under a recorded deed of trust. In 1959, Title Insurance reconveyed the platted land back to Garland by a deed of reconveyance. In 1960, Garland entered into a one-year lease, with an option to purchase the plat, with Eagle River First Baptist Church (Eagle River), which took possession immediately and held weekly services on the property. Garland died in 1961. In 1962, the National Bank of Alaska executed an administrator’s deed purportedly conveying the property to Muldoon Road Baptist Church, Inc. (Muldoon) (defendant), the successor to Eagle River. In 1967, Lott filed suit to eject Muldoon from the property and to quiet title to the portion she owned. The trial court found that Lott had no right or interest in the property, and Lott appealed.

Rule of Law

The rule of law is the black letter law upon which the court rested its decision.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Issue

The issue section includes the dispositive legal issue in the case phrased as a question.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Holding and Reasoning (Boney, J.)

The holding and reasoning section includes:

  • A "yes" or "no" answer to the question framed in the issue section;
  • A summary of the majority or plurality opinion, using the CREAC method; and
  • The procedural disposition (e.g. reversed and remanded, affirmed, etc.).

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

Concurrence/Dissent (Rabinowitz, J.)

The concurrence/dissent section is for members only and includes a summary of the judge’s concurrence in part and dissent in part.

To access this section, please start your free trial or log in.

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.

Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.