## Facts

- In 1947, Ida Romero and her husband, Octaviano Garcia, purchased an approximately 13-acre tract from Octaviano’s father, Antonio Garcia, out of Antonio’s larger tract.
- A Spanish-language deed was recorded in 1950; the translated description identified the 13-acre parcel by metes and bounds and by reference to surrounding lands and landmarks.
- Antonio’s wife did not sign the deed, though her signature was required for conveyance of community real property, making the deed ineffective to pass legal title.
- After the purchase, Romero and Octaviano took possession, built a home on the land (with defendants’ assistance), and occupied it as their residence.
- The tract’s boundaries were associated with long-standing fences, and Romero consistently treated and identified the same enclosed area as her land.
- Octaviano died in 1962; Romero later left the state and remarried but continued to claim ownership.
- Romero at times fell behind on property taxes but paid delinquent taxes before any tax deed issued to the state.
- Romero filed a quiet title action asserting ownership by adverse possession for more than ten years under color of title and payment of taxes.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court applied an incorrect evidentiary standard for proving adverse possession and quieting title.
2. Whether a deed void for lack of a spouse’s signature can constitute color of title, and whether the deed’s description was sufficiently definite to identify an ascertainable tract.
3. Whether the property was properly assessed and whether Romero satisfied the statutory tax-payment requirement despite occasional delinquencies.

## Decision

- The New Mexico Supreme Court affirmed the judgment quieting title in Romero.
- The court held the trial court did not misapply the standard of proof and that the evidence supported adverse possession under color of title.
- The court held a deed can provide color of title even if void for lack of a community spouse’s signature.
- The court held the deed’s description was adequate because, using the deed and extrinsic evidence, a surveyor could locate the boundaries intended to be conveyed.
- The court held the evidence supported findings of proper assessment and sufficient tax payment; delinquent periods did not defeat the claim where no tax deed issued.

## Legal Principles

- An instrument that purports to convey land may constitute color of title for adverse possession even if the instrument is void, including for failure to satisfy community-property conveyancing formalities.
- A deed’s land description is sufficient if, by reasonable construction and with extrinsic evidence, the property intended to be conveyed can be identified on the ground.
- In adverse possession claims under color of title, evidence of actual, open, notorious, exclusive, and hostile possession for the statutory period supports quiet title.
- For adverse possession statutes requiring tax payment, temporary delinquency does not necessarily defeat the claim where taxes are paid before divestiture by tax deed and the trial court’s findings are supported by the record.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed quiet title in favor of Romero, holding that a void deed can supply color of title and that an imprecise description may be made definite through extrinsic evidence sufficient for a surveyor to locate the parcel, while evidence supported the required possession and tax-payment elements.


Romero v. Garcia, 89 N.M. 1, 546 P.2d 66 (N.M. 1976)