Lonnie owns Blackacre. Toni has lived on Blackacre as Lonnie’s tenant for 18 years and the two have become good friends. One day Lonnie gets ill and is afraid that he might die. So, he draws up a deed that states “I, Lonnie, hereby grant Blackacre to my tenant of the past 18 years.” Is this deed sufficient to transfer Blackacre to Lonnie Yes because a deed has no formal requirements Yes; because the deed has a granting clause and identifies that the land to be conveyed is “Blackacre.” No; because the deed does not name the grantee No; because just saying that “Blackacre” is being conveyed is not a specific enough description

Lonnie owns Blackacre. Toni has lived on Blackacre as Lonnie’s tenant for 18 years and the two have become good friends. One day Lonnie gets ill and is afraid that he might die. So, he draws up a proper deed with the intent of giving the deed to Toni, thereby conveying Blackacre to her. Lonnie gives the deed to his friend, Mike and he tells Mike to give the deed to Toni the next time Mike sees her. Unfortunately, Lonnie dies before Mike next sees Toni. Has Blackacre successfully been transferred to Toni? Yes; because Lonnie wrote up the deed with the intent of conveying it to Toni Yes; because Mike was acting as Toni’s agent when he accepted the deed from Lonnie No; because there was no consideration given by Toni to Lonnie in exchange for the deed No; because the delivery was never completed before Lonnie died.

Slick sells Greyacre to Gully. At the closing, he conveys Greyacre to Gully using a quitclaim deed, which Gully accepts. It turns out that Bank owned a mortgage on Greyacre that Slick failed to disclose at the closing. Three months later, Bank repossessed Greayacre. Is Slick liable to Gully for the damage caused by the repossession? No, because he gave Gully a quitclaim deed Yes, because even a quitclaim deed comes with a guarantee against unknown encumbrances Yes, because Slick violated the implied warranty of quiet enjoyment Yes, because Slick had a contractual duty to convey marketable title and he did not do so

Slick owns Greyacre that he bought from Superslick and from whom he received a properly executed and delivered deed. Slick sells Greyacre to Gully. At the closing, he conveys Greyacre to Gully with a properly executed and delivered deed. It turns out that Superslick never really owned Greyacre. He had forged the property records to make it appear that he owned Greyacre. Vic, the true owner of the property from whom Superslick stole the property, brings an action against Gully and evicts him. Gully sues Slick. Is Slick liable to Gully for damages resulting from his eviction? Yes, no matter what type of deed Slick gave to Gully Yes, if Slick gave Gully a quitclaim deed to Greyacre Yes, if Slick gave Gully a special warranty deed to Greyacre Yes, if Slick gave Gully a general warranty deed to Greyacre

© 2003 - 2024 National Paralegal College