## Facts

- In 1955, Robert Camp, Jr. (then unmarried) and his mother, Tincy Camp, purchased a house and lot in Richmond, Virginia.
- The deed conveyed the property to Robert and Tincy “as tenants in common with the right of survivorship as at common law,” and contained no habendum clause.
- Robert married Hilda Camp in 1956.
- Robert died in 1966, survived by Hilda, their six children, and Tincy.
- Hilda and the children claimed Robert and Tincy held as tenants in common, so Robert’s one-half interest passed to his heirs.
- Tincy claimed the deed created a survivorship estate so that Robert’s interest passed to her by operation of law.
- In the declaratory-judgment action, the drafting attorney testified he mistakenly used the phrase “tenants in common,” but the parties intended survivorship.
- The trial court ruled that the property passed to Tincy in fee simple by survivorship; Hilda and the children appealed.

## Issues

1. Whether a deed conveying property to two grantees “as tenants in common with the right of survivorship as at common law” creates a survivorship estate, and if so, whether the deceased grantee’s heirs take any interest.
2. Whether extrinsic evidence may be used to alter the legal effect of a deed whose operative language is clear.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed.
- The deed’s express survivorship language was effective to create a survivorship estate equivalent in operation to a common-law joint tenancy, despite the use of the words “tenants in common.”
- Upon Robert’s death, his interest did not pass to his widow and children; it passed to Tincy by right of survivorship, leaving her with fee simple title.

## Legal Principles

- Deed construction is governed by the grantor’s intent as expressed in the instrument read as a whole, so long as it is lawful.
- When deed language contains both a general label and specific operative terms that conflict, courts give effect to the specific operative terms.
- Statutory presumptions favoring tenancy in common yield to clear survivorship language in the deed.
- Parol evidence cannot contradict clear and unambiguous deed language; where the deed itself sufficiently expresses survivorship, extrinsic testimony of drafting mistake is not needed to determine its legal effect.

## Conclusion

Because the deed expressly provided for “right of survivorship as at common law,” the court construed it to create a survivorship estate, so the surviving co-owner took the entire property and the deceased co-owner’s heirs received no interest.


Camp v. Camp, 260 S.E.2d 243 (Va. 1979)