Titles Flashcards
Why does the land on which the storage was located belong to Lisa if (1) Flanders built a storage shed accidentally on Homer’s property, which stood for 16Y, (2) Homer discovered the mistake when looking to sell his property to Lisa, (3) Flanders apologized and dismantled the shed, (4) Homer transferred title to Lisa who recorded the deed, (4) 6M later, Flanders conveyed the property to Rod, (5) Rod tried to build a shed on the same location but Lisa objected, (6) adverse possession is 15Y, (7) race only recording act?
Flander’s possession of the land wasn’t hostile - majority of jurisdictions consider hostile to only mean without permission but it could be the case that Oregon follows the minority jurisdiction whereby hostile requires bad faith intent - since Flanders did not act in bad faith, he would never have been able to meet all of the elements of adverse possession - however if adverse possession did occur, Flanders couldn’t give the land back just by dismantling the shed, he would’ve had to actively give it back
Who owns land between son and daughter if (1) Dr. Marvin Monroe wrote down, signed, and dated the intention to transfer land in fee simple absolute to his son after finding out he has terminal illness, (2) Dr. Monroe took the document to Moe and asked him to hold it until Monroe died, after which he should give it to his son, (3) after Dr. Monroe died, will validly executed 11Y ago was found devising the land to his daughter, (4) son and daughter were only heirs?
The son - document took effect before the will - it essentially created a life estate for Dr. Marvin Monroe and a remainder interest to his son - (1) it was a valid deed b/c (a) ID’d himself and his son, (b) had description of property, and (c) signed by Dr. Monroe - (2) also expressed intent for the transfer to take place immediately - (3) giving it to Moe w/o reserving right to reclaim effects delivery, (4) son’s acceptance is presumed b/c beneficial to son
Can Grimes Sr. set aside the cabin conveyance to Homer if (1) Mr. Grimes Sr. executed a valid written deed to convey cabin to Frank Grimes, and properly recorded it, (2) he didn’t tell Grimey b/c wanted it to be a surprise, (3) Grimey died suddenly before he was told about the deed from electrocution, (4) Grimey’s will left his entire estate to Homer, (5) Grimes Sr. wanted to keep the cabin with the family?
No - Grimes Sr. recorded the deed conveying the cabin to Grimey, which created the existence of intent to grant the cabin to Grimey, also creating rebuttable presumption that the deed was presently operative - there is no need for physical transfer of the deed b/c intent is already shown by recording - Grimey is presumed to have accepted b/c the conveyance is beneficial for him and relates back to the date the deed was transferred, in this case would be the date of recording
Should Patty and Selma’s representative use the residuary estate to pay off the mortgage on the house they inherited from Aunt Gladys if (1) Aunt Gladys gives house to Patty and Selma and remainder of estate to Marge, (2) house has mortgage equal to value of residuary estate, (3) will has general provision for paying Aunt Gladys’ debt but not specific portion about paying the outstanding mortgage, (4) Oregon follows common law?
Yes - Patty and Selma have right to exoneration of mortgage b/c under common law doctrine of exoneration of liens, they can have the remaining balance of a mortgage paid by remaining assets of Aunt Gladys’ estate - however most states have abolished this doctrine and property passes with encumbrance - however, general provision for payment doens’t require personal representative to pay off any mortgages or encumbrances on real property
Who owns the property if (1) O conveys building to C, who didn’t record deed, (2) C sold building to B w/ valid deed + B recorded deed, (3) before B could move in, O saw building was vacant so conveyed to F, who had no knowledge of conveyance to C and proceeded to record the deed, (4) C recorded deed from O to C?
F owns the building - even though B recorded its deed, C never recorded its deed from O, making the recording deed from C to B is a wild deed b/c it doesn’t fit within chain of title - as such (1) F would not have had constructive or actual notice b/c searching for O would show that O could make the transfer and (2) B lost the race b/c the chain of ownership curing the wild deed occurred after F already recorded
Who has legal title to property if (1) owner thought it was conveying to buyer + brother as TIC, (2) in fact, buyer, not brother, contracted roommate to stand in for brother but owner didn’t know, (3) they properly closed + pay full price + recorded deed, (4) brother actually died day before closing, (5) brother will gave all property to wife, (6) buyer took sole possession of property?
1/2 buyer and 1/2 owner - deed to brother is void b/c as of the date of the closing, the brother was a non-existent grantee, but this would not affect the conveyance of buyer’s half though buyer could probably recoup 1/2 purchase price in unjust enrichment; wife couldn’t compel transfer b/c brother wasn’t actual party and didn’t contract roommate to authorize transfer
Who has title to the property between Ling Bouvier and Patty Bouvier if (1) Selma went on a trip and left valid deed in property giving property to Patty who was watching the property when Selma was away, (2) Patty found the deed and note saying that the property now belongs to her, (3) Selma in note says not to record until she returned, (4) Selma died before returning and Patty immediately recorded, (5) Selma had no will, (6) all property passes to Ling according to intestate laws, (7) race record state?
Patty - normally Selma would not have had a presumption of transferring the property b/c she left the deed in her home but in this case, the note clearly indicated her intent to transfer the property to Patty effective immediately - therefore, the note indicates delivery
Can Crazy Cat Lady’s conservator eject Moe if (1) -25Y, Crazy Cat Lady’s mother devised her a piece of land right next to Moe’s Tavern when she was 17YO, (2) Moe began to possess the land at the time by planting crops, parking cars, and using it for all sorts of miscellaneous purposes, (3) -19Y, Moe went to Germany for a year to develop his own brew and didn’t use the land at all except for a gardening shed on the land, (4) -14Y, Crazy Cat Lady went off the deep end and needed a conservator, (5) adverse possession runs for 21Y unless owner was <18YO or mentally incompetent when action accrues - can be brought by person within 10Y after turning 18 / becomes competent?
Yes - Moe was not in continuous possession for 21Y b/c he spent a year in Germany after 5Y and as of today, has only been in continuous possession for 20Y
Does the attorney have to deliver the deed to Lisa if (1) Bleeding Gums Murphy decided to give his jazz club to his nephew, (2) he took the deed to his attorney and told him to deliver the deed to the nephew upon Murphy’s death, (3) also told the attorney to return the deed if he asked, (4) these instructions were not in writing and the deed was not recorded but he did email the nephew telling him of the arrangement, (5) nephew died suddenly and devised the jazz club to Lisa, (6) Bleeding Gums later died intestate with his two sons as his only heirs?
No - Bleeding Gums never put the deed beyond his control b/c he reserved the right to take back the deed from the attorney, he did not create a valid death escrow, although death escrows do not need to be in writing - nephew never got the jazz club so it was still part of Bleeding Gums’ estate, which passed onto his sons intestate
Can Moe set aside the conveyance of his bar to Barney if (1) Moe orally agreed to convey the bar to Barney if Barney remained sober for the next 12M, (2) they execute valid deed, which was given to Barney, (3) Barney started drinking again but still tried to get possession of the bar, (4) Moe refused, (5) Barney recorded the deed?
No - their oral condition for Barney’s sobriety is not enforceable - even though parole evidence is normally admissible to show Moe lacked intent, this would not work where a deed was given to Barney but the deed lacked their oral condition - since the condition of sobriety is not enforceable, Moe must perform and convey his bar to Barney
Will Marge be entitled to the apartment complex if (1) Aunt Gladys executed a valid deed transferring the apartment complex to Marge, and recorded, (2) Aunt Gladys died in her sleep before attorney delivered the deed to Marge, (3) Aunt Gladys had a prior will of which only she was aware, which was validly executed by a now-deceased lawyer, (4) the will devised the apartment complex to Patty and Selma?
Yes - Marge gets the apartment complex b/c the deed rather than the will governs ownership of the apartment complex - here, the deed was validly executed and recorded, operating the transfer of the apartment complex to Marge, as executing a valid deed and recording it removed Aunt Gladys’ power to revoke it - Marge’s acceptance is presumed b/c this is beneficial for her, and is treated at the time of the transfer rather than physical delivery of the deed to Marge - all this was done before Aunt Gladys died, thereby prioritizing the deed over the will
Who owns the land if (1) Aunt Gladys wanted to give her land to Patty as a surprise, so she prepared, signed and recorded the deed, (2) she never delivered the deed b/c she just had a falling out with Patty, (3) Patty found out about the deed among Aunt Glady’s papers, (4) Patty sold the land by quitclaim deed to Dr. Hibbert in good faith, who recorded the deed, (5) Aunt Gladys left the land to Selma by will, (6) Oregon = race notice
Selma b/c she was the devisee of Aunt Glady’s land - normally recording the deed creates a presumption of delivery but Gladys and Patty’s falling out rebuts this presumption - since she retained ownership until her death, the land would have passed to Selma - Dr. Hibbert while usually protected from other claimants since he was a good faith buyer, doesn’t get protection b/c Patty never had ownership of the land
Who will prevail if (1) Frank conveyed Dee some land (2) Dee sold land to Rickety Cricket and the two entered into valid written land sales contract, (3) at closing, Cricket paid purchase price and Dee delivered general warranty deed, which Cricket accepted, (4) Cricket saw that Frank had granted fishermen an easement to use part of the land, (5) Cricket demanded from Dee rescission of the contract and demanded the return of the purchase price?
Dee - the obligation of the land sales contract to deliver marketable title merged with the deed upon delivery so the deed controls - any obligation contained in the sale can’t be enforced unless the deed also contains the obligation - in this case, the deed did not contain the implied covenant of marketable title so Cricket would not be able to sue Dee under this remedy - Cricket would only be able to sue under whatever is in the deed
Does Dee own a residence if (1) Barbara told Dee that when she goes to a nursing home, she will give her the residence, (2) Barbara had an attorney prepare the deed, which didn’t contain any restrictions on transfer, (3) Dee found the deed after snooping around Barbara’s papers and recorded it, (4) Barbara went to a nursing home and didn’t do anything with regards to the deed, (5) Barbara then executed a valid will leaving her entire estate to Dennis, (6) after Barbara dies, the entire estate including the residence was transferred to Dennis?
No - the deed was never delivered to Dee - Barbara needed to have an intent to make a present transfer of the residence to Dee, which is manifested by delivery - but here she kept the deed, so the transfer is not presumed - as such, Barbara retained possession of the deed so there is no presumption of transfer - at most, Barbara had an intent ot make a future gift of the residence - it doesn’t help that Dee recorded the deed w/o Barbara’s knowledge b/c Barbara needed to be the one to record or at least should have been the one to tell Dee to record - also even though Barbara did go to a nursing home, she didn’t take further action with regards to the deed
Is Gil engaging in the unauthorized practice of law if he is inputting info like borrower’s name, address, SSN, and loan terms into standardized promissory note forms prepared by attorneys in the same mortgage lending firm, for which the firm charges borrowers reasonable fees to prepare these documents?
No - Gil is not engaging in the unauthorized practice of law b/c he is not exercising legal discretion in completing the documents - he is just filling out blanks on standardized form
