Full access allows:
- Solve all tests online without limits;
- Remove all advertisements on website;
- Adding questions to favorite list;
- Save learning progress;
- Save results of practice exams;
- Watching all wrong answered questions.
44. Who is entitled to ownership of the cabin?
Other than the jurisdiction's statute of frauds and statute of wills, there are no applicable statutes.
One year later, the man died, and the attorney immediately recorded the deed. At the time of the man's death, the cabin was titled in his name and he owned no other real property. The daughter and the son now disagree as to who is entitled to ownership of the cabin.
Three weeks after dropping off the deed, the man properly drafted and executed his own will, which left all of his real property to his son.
A man decided to give a cabin he owned to his daughter at his death. To accomplish this goal, he delivered to his attorney a deed that fully complied with the applicable statute of frauds and told his attorney to record the deed when he died unless he later gave the attorney instructions to the contrary.
Comments (0)
There are no comments at the moment. If you found an error or think question is incorrect, tell everyone about it
Only signed in users can write comments
Signin
Every deed should contain the following information:
An indication that it is a deedA description of the property involvedThe signature of the individual or entity that is transferring the propertyData regarding who is taking title to the propertyPhysical delivery is not always necessary, as delivery refers more to the grantor's intent. Delivery may be satisfied by words or conduct that evidence an intent that the deed has some present operating effect. Delivery must show an intent that title passes immediately and irrevocably, even though the right of possession may be postponed until some future time. Delivery conditioned on death may be valid if there is a present intent to convey a future interest to the grantee, such as the grantor's intent to create a remainder with a life estate reserved to the grantor. The grantor would have to intend that the deed would be operative immediately to convey a future interest. Contrast to a situation where the instructions are to deliver the deed to the grantee only if he or she survives the grantor. There is generally no valid delivery. In such a case, it is the grantor's intent to retain title and possession until the grantor's death.
C is correct. In this question, the delivery conditioned upon the death of the grantor was not valid because the man intended to keep title and possession until his death. He did not intend title to pass immediately to the daughter irrevocably. The man told the attorney to hold the deed and record it unless he gave further instructions. The man was intending the attorney to hold the deed in case he changed his mind. He did not intend the deed to pass immediately and irrevocably to the daughter. The man did in fact change his mind, because he then drafted a will, leaving all of his real estate to his son. Delivery to the daughter during her lifetime did not need to be physical. Delivery may have been evidenced by words or conduct evidencing the man's intent that the deed has some present operative effect. The man did not have such an intent, therefore, there was no proper delivery to the daughter.
A is incorrect. As explained above, there was no valid delivery of the deed to the daughter. Delivery requires that title pass immediately and irrevocably to be valid, and the delivery in these facts does not fulfill these requirements.
B is incorrect. Delivery requires intent that title passes immediately and irrevocably. The fact that this deed complied with the Statute of Frauds is irrelevant to this intent requirement.
D is incorrect. A will does not always revoke a gift. If the delivery here had been effective, the son would not have received title, because the daughter would already have taken possession.