St. Paul Title Ins. Corp. v. Owen case brief summary
452 So. 2d 482 (1984)
CASE FACTS
The owner executed a warranty deed that purported to convey certain real property to the individuals. The deed contained the covenants of seizin, right to convey, quiet enjoyment, against encumbrances and warranty. The individuals purportedly conveyed the property to one of the individuals' brother. The brother mortgaged the property to a mortgage company. He later mortgaged it to the subrogor. A policy of title insurance that named the subrogor as the insured was then issued by the subrogee's agent. When the brother defaulted on his mortgage payments, the subrogor attempted to foreclose on the property. The circuit court found that it was not entitled to do that because the brother had no right in the property when it was mortgaged. The subrogor brought suit against the subrogee. The subrogee filed a complaint against the owner and the individuals, and the circuit court found against it.
DISCUSSION
The court reversed the judgment and held that the owner was liable to the subrogee because he breached the express covenants of title contained in his warranty deed, as the covenants of quiet enjoyment and warranty ran with the land purportedly conveyed by that instrument.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed and remanded the judgment, which found in favor of the owner and individuals on the subrogee's complaint that alleged breach of covenants of title.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
452 So. 2d 482 (1984)
CASE SYNOPSIS
Appellant subrogee sought review of the
judgment of the Baldwin Circuit Court (Alabama), which found in favor
of appellees, owner and individuals, on the subrogee's complaint that
alleged breach of covenants of title.CASE FACTS
The owner executed a warranty deed that purported to convey certain real property to the individuals. The deed contained the covenants of seizin, right to convey, quiet enjoyment, against encumbrances and warranty. The individuals purportedly conveyed the property to one of the individuals' brother. The brother mortgaged the property to a mortgage company. He later mortgaged it to the subrogor. A policy of title insurance that named the subrogor as the insured was then issued by the subrogee's agent. When the brother defaulted on his mortgage payments, the subrogor attempted to foreclose on the property. The circuit court found that it was not entitled to do that because the brother had no right in the property when it was mortgaged. The subrogor brought suit against the subrogee. The subrogee filed a complaint against the owner and the individuals, and the circuit court found against it.
DISCUSSION
The court reversed the judgment and held that the owner was liable to the subrogee because he breached the express covenants of title contained in his warranty deed, as the covenants of quiet enjoyment and warranty ran with the land purportedly conveyed by that instrument.
CONCLUSION
The court reversed and remanded the judgment, which found in favor of the owner and individuals on the subrogee's complaint that alleged breach of covenants of title.
Suggested law school study materials
Shop Amazon for the best prices on Law School Course Materials
.
No comments:
Post a Comment