Romero v. Garcia

Supreme Court of New Mexico · 2005 · Property

546 P.2d 66 (N.M. 1976)

Updated July 23, 2026

PropertyAdverse PossessionColor of TitleDeed DescriptionTaxesvoid deedcommunity property signatureextrinsic evidence

Facts

In 1947, plaintiff and her husband bought 13 acres from the husband's father, but the husband's mother did not sign the deed. Plaintiff and her husband entered into possession, built a home on the land with defendants' help, and the deed was recorded in 1950. Defendants later challenged the deed as insufficient color of title and too indefinite in description to identify the tract. Plaintiff had also paid taxes on the land, though at times she was in arrears, always paying before any tax deed issued to the state.

Issue

Whether plaintiff could quiet title by adverse possession where the deed was allegedly void for lack of the wife grantor's signature, the deed description allegedly did not identify an ascertainable tract, and tax payments were not always current. More specifically, the court had to decide whether the deed supplied color of title, whether the land could be located by the description aided by extrinsic evidence, and whether plaintiff substantially complied with the continuous tax-payment requirement.

Rule

A deed may provide color of title for adverse possession even if it is void because a member of the community did not sign it. A deed is not void for uncertainty of description if, using the deed together with extrinsic evidence, a surveyor can ascertain the land and establish its boundaries; subsequent acts of the parties may clarify an indefinite description. For adverse possession under the tax-payment statute, substantial compliance with continuous payment is satisfied where taxes are paid before a tax deed issues to the state.

🔒

See the holding & full analysis

Create a free KwikCourt account to unlock the rest of this brief — and practice the case.

The court's holding and reasoning
Doctrine tests, pitfalls & exam hypotheticals
10 practice questions + 4 AI-graded essays on this case

Free sample · practice this case

Test yourself

One of 10 multiple-choice questions for this case. Pick an answer to see why.

In rural New Mexico, Mateo Ruiz received a recorded deed to 15 acres from Elena Varela. Elena's husband never signed the instrument, so the deed was ineffective as a conveyance of community property. Mateo immediately took possession, fenced the tract, and later asserted adverse possession under color of title.

Does the missing spouse's signature, by itself, prevent Mateo from relying on the deed as color of title?

Explanation. The controlling rule is that a deed can constitute color of title even though it is void because a member of the community failed to sign. The deed's invalidity as a conveyance does not by itself defeat its use as color of title for adverse possession.