## Facts

- A Missouri farm was conveyed in 1969 to two married couples—Robert and Irma Nelson, and Herbert and Dorothy Hotchkiss—stating the grantees held “as joint tenants with right of survivorship in all four, and not as tenants in common.”
- There was no evidence about the drafter’s intent or surrounding circumstances of the 1969 deed.
- In 1975, Robert and Irma dissolved their marriage; the approved separation agreement treated them as owners of a one-half undivided interest, to remain joint property for two years, and gave Irma an option to buy Robert’s interest.
- In 1976, Robert conveyed his interest to Herbert and Dorothy.
- Herbert died in 1977.
- In Irma’s partition action, the trial court allocated sale proceeds as 5/8 to Dorothy and 3/8 to Irma, reasoning only Robert’s one-fourth was severed.
- The appellate court concluded Dorothy was entitled to 3/4 and Irma to 1/4, and the Missouri Supreme Court granted transfer.

## Issues

1. How should a deed to two married couples be construed when it describes “joint tenancy with right of survivorship in all four”: as four individual joint tenants, or as two tenancies by the entirety (one per couple) in one-half interests?
2. What effect did the Nelson dissolution and Robert’s later conveyance have on survivorship and the fractional interests to be distributed in partition?
3. What allocation of partition sale proceeds correctly reflects the parties’ interests after the post-deed events?

## Decision

- The Missouri Supreme Court reversed the trial court’s allocation of ownership interests and partition proceeds.
- The Court held the 1969 deed created a tenancy by the entirety in each married couple as to an undivided one-half interest, absent clear language negating that presumption.
- Applying the dissolution and subsequent conveyance to the resulting estates, the Court directed that Dorothy receive three-fourths and Irma one-fourth of the net partition proceeds.
- The Court affirmed the trial court’s award of attorney’s fees.

## Legal Principles

- In Missouri, a conveyance to “husband and wife” is presumed to create a tenancy by the entirety unless a contrary intent clearly appears in the instrument.
- When the deed language is compatible with an entirety construction and there is no extrinsic evidence showing a different intent, the presumption controls even if the deed also uses joint-tenancy terminology.
- Changes in marital status and later conveyances can alter survivorship and fractional interests; partition proceeds must follow the interests as they exist at the time of partition, as determined by the governing concurrent-estate rules.
- Attorney’s fees in partition are reviewed for error in the trial court’s exercise of discretion; absent error, the award stands.

## Conclusion

The court treated the deed to two married couples as creating two tenancies by the entirety in one-half interests, then applied the later dissolution, conveyance, and death to conclude Dorothy owned three-fourths and Irma one-fourth of the partition proceeds, while leaving the attorney’s fee award intact.


Nelson v. Hotchkiss, 601 S.W.2d 14 (Mo. 1980)