{ "id": 1575450, "name": "Ignacio PEREA, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. Nasario MARTINEZ et al., Defendants-Appellees and Cross-Appellants", "name_abbreviation": "Perea v. Martinez", "decision_date": "1980-11-12", "docket_number": "No. 12642", "first_page": "84", "last_page": "86", "citations": [ { "type": "official", "cite": "95 N.M. 84" }, { "type": "parallel", "cite": "619 P.2d 188" } ], "court": { "name_abbreviation": "N.M.", "id": 8835, "name": "Supreme Court of New Mexico" }, "jurisdiction": { "id": 52, "name_long": "New Mexico", "name": "N.M." }, "cites_to": [ { "cite": "81 N.M. 467", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.M.", "case_ids": [ 5370949 ], "weight": 2, "year": 1970, "pin_cites": [ { "page": "469" }, { "page": "634" } ], "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nm/81/0467-01" ] }, { "cite": "26 N.M. 346", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.M.", "case_ids": [ 8842070 ], "year": 1920, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nm/26/0346-01" ] }, { "cite": "87 N.M. 3", "category": "reporters:state", "reporter": "N.M.", "case_ids": [ 2829852 ], "weight": 2, "year": 1974, "opinion_index": 0, "case_paths": [ "/nm/87/0003-01" ] } ], "analysis": { "cardinality": 269, "char_count": 3747, "ocr_confidence": 0.842, "pagerank": { "raw": 1.0017369929335186e-07, "percentile": 0.5390586478207803 }, "sha256": "60c06e154c2327a9c97e19e39011f0d5431daeb1aa500f16a2fc1cf6aaeb5ed2", "simhash": "1:8eea641d2014c8d8", "word_count": 601 }, "last_updated": "2023-07-14T19:05:15.389388+00:00", "provenance": { "date_added": "2019-08-29", "source": "Harvard", "batch": "2018" }, "casebody": { "judges": [ "EASLEY and FEDERICI, JJ., concur." ], "parties": [ "Ignacio PEREA, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. Nasario MARTINEZ et al., Defendants-Appellees and Cross-Appellants." ], "opinions": [ { "text": "OPINION\nPAUL SNEAD, District Judge.\nAppellant Perea brought suit in Sandoval County to quiet title to 24.804 acres of land. Appellees, identified collectively as the \u201cCaird\u201d group, counterclaimed seeking to quiet title to 143.473 acres of land. The land claimed by Perea bisects the land claimed by the Caird group. The lands are located on the westerly extension of the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District.\nThe trial court found that the exterior boundaries of the lands in question did not contain the total acreage claimed by the opposing parties, and that the totaled surveyed acreage was 153.92 acres. The court resolved the problem by relocating the tract of appellant on the northern boundary of Appellee\u2019s land, splitting the shortage in land, and quieting title in appellant to 15 acres and appellees in 138.923 acres.\nWe reverse.\nIt is elementary law that in a suit to quiet title to real estate, the plaintiff must recover upon the strength of his own title and not the weakness of that of his adversary. Lerma v. Romero, 87 N.M. 3, 528 P.2d 647 (1974); Abeyta v. Tafoya, 26 N.M. 346, 192 P.481 (1920). Appellant has failed to establish his title. Appellant\u2019s claim of title to 24.804 acres rests on a conveyance from Juan F. Chavez on April 10, 1945, containing the following description:\nSandoval County, New Mexico, Map 15, Tract 14A and mesa land.\nThe tract presently claimed is the \u201cmesa land.\u201d\nThe description in the deed is inadequate to identify the particular land being conveyed. Appellant concedes the description is inadequate and seeks to remedy the deed by reference to extrinsic evidence. The evidence in support of the claim is that the grantor, at the time of conveyance, pointed out the boundaries to appellant; appellant subsequently had the land surveyed and monumented, and paid taxes on the land so identified.\nSuch description and extrinsic evidence is inadequate. In Komadina v. Edmondson, 81 N.M. 467, 469, 468 P.2d 632, 634 (1970), this Court stated:\nThe grantor\u2019s intent must be ascertained from the description contained in the deed which must itself be certain or capable of being reduced to certainty by something extrinsic to which the deed refers. (Citation omitted.) Consequently, if extrinsic evidence is to be relied upon to identify the land intended to be conveyed, the deed itself must point to the source from which such evidence is to be sought. (Citations omitted.)\nAppellant, at argument, disclaims any intent to claim by adverse possession, and relies on his record title to support his claim. We therefore find it unnecessary to determine whether appellant may have established title by adverse possession.\nChain of title to the tract of appellees is complete. Appellees predecessors in title quieted title to the property in question in 1927, the lands are adequately identified by survey which was used as the description in that suit. The decree in that cause has never been challenged, and appellees are entitled to have the title quieted against claims of the appellant.\nThe judgment is reversed. The trial court is directed to set the same aside, and to enter a judgment by which appellant takes nothing on his complaint, and title is quieted in appellees to 143.473 acres as described in the counter-claim and requested findings of appellees.\nIT IS SO ORDERED.\nEASLEY and FEDERICI, JJ., concur.", "type": "majority", "author": "PAUL SNEAD, District Judge." } ], "attorneys": [ "Lorenzo A. Chavez, Martin J. Chavez, Albuquerque, for plaintiff-appellant and cross-appellee.", "Cohen & Aldridge, Oliver Burton Cohen, Albuquerque, for defendants-appellees and cross-appellants." ], "corrections": "", "head_matter": "619 P.2d 188\nIgnacio PEREA, Plaintiff-Appellant and Cross-Appellee, v. Nasario MARTINEZ et al., Defendants-Appellees and Cross-Appellants.\nNo. 12642.\nSupreme Court of New Mexico.\nNov. 12, 1980.\nLorenzo A. Chavez, Martin J. Chavez, Albuquerque, for plaintiff-appellant and cross-appellee.\nCohen & Aldridge, Oliver Burton Cohen, Albuquerque, for defendants-appellees and cross-appellants." }, "file_name": "0084-01", "first_page_order": 116, "last_page_order": 118 }