Babb v. Weemer case brief summary
225 Cal. App. 2d 546 (1964)
CASE FACTS
The purchasers entered into an agreement to purchase property from the seller. The grant deed to the purchasers recited that the property was conveyed subject to encumbrances and easements of record. In researching the title to the property, the purchasers discovered that the grant deed to the purchasers did not reference a trust deed held by the individual. The purchasers therefore claimed that the grant deed to the purchasers was free and clear of all encumbrances and that this defect ran with the land to the benefit of the purchasers.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The lower court held for the individual and the court affirmed.
DISCUSSION
The court affirmed the lower court and decided for the individual and against the purchasers. Further, the court found that the purchasers' claim was entirely without merit and, as one of the purchasers was an attorney, the court ordered the purchasers to pay the individual $ 500 in attorney fees as a penalty.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
225 Cal. App. 2d 546 (1964)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Plaintiff purchasers sought review of a
decision of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County (California) in
favor of defendant individual in an action for an alleged breach of
covenant in a grant deed.CASE FACTS
The purchasers entered into an agreement to purchase property from the seller. The grant deed to the purchasers recited that the property was conveyed subject to encumbrances and easements of record. In researching the title to the property, the purchasers discovered that the grant deed to the purchasers did not reference a trust deed held by the individual. The purchasers therefore claimed that the grant deed to the purchasers was free and clear of all encumbrances and that this defect ran with the land to the benefit of the purchasers.
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
The lower court held for the individual and the court affirmed.
DISCUSSION
- The court held that covenants that land was free from encumbrances were personal covenants not running with the land and that they did not entitle a succeeding grantee to maintain an action in his own name for their breach.
- Further, the seller disclosed the encumbrance.
- Thus, the court held that there could be no implied covenant where the subject matter was expressly agreed upon by the parties to the contrary.
The court affirmed the lower court and decided for the individual and against the purchasers. Further, the court found that the purchasers' claim was entirely without merit and, as one of the purchasers was an attorney, the court ordered the purchasers to pay the individual $ 500 in attorney fees as a penalty.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment