Postby FormerChild » Wed Jun 28, 2017 6:37 pm
Confused as to a Titles issue and BFP's, not sure how to word it so I'll just include the Adaptibar question that confused me:
"The owner in fee simple of Richacre, a large parcel of vacant land, executed a deed purporting to convey Richacre to her nephew. The owner told her nephew, who was then 19, about the deed and said that she would give it to him when he reached 21 and had received his undergraduate college degree. Shortly afterward the nephew searched the owner's desk, found and removed the deed, and recorded it.
A month later, the nephew executed an instrument in the proper form of a warranty deed purporting to convey Richacre to his fiancee. He delivered the deed reciting that it was given in exchange for "$1 and other good and valuable consideration," and explained that to make it valid the fiancee must pay him $1. The fiancee, impressed and grateful, did so. Together, they went to the recording office and recorded the deed. The fiancee assumed the nephew had owned Richacre, and knew nothing about the nephew's dealing with the owner. Neither the owner's deed to the nephew nor the nephew's deed to his fiancee mentioned anything about any conditions.
The recording act of the jurisdiction provides: "No conveyance or mortgage of real property shall be good against subsequent purchasers for value and without notice unless the same be recorded according to law."
Two years passed. The nephew turned 21, then graduated from college. At the graduation party, the owner was chatting with the fiancee and for the first time learned the foregoing facts.
The age of majority in the jurisdiction is 18 years old.
The owner brought an appropriate action against the fiancee to quiet title to Richacre.
The court will decide for …
A. the owner, because the nephew's deed to the fiancee before the nephew satisfied the owner's conditions was void, because the fiancee had paid only nominal consideration.
B. the owner, because her deed to the nephew was not delivered.
C. the fiancee, because the nephew has satisfied the owner's oral conditions.
D. the fiancee, because the deed to her was recorded. "
The answer is B. I get the delivery concept totally and understand why the owner retailed title. What I don't understand, and what the explanation did not touch on, was why the fiancee is not a BFP? Even if she were a BFP, would the owner still have a superior title b/c the original deed to the nephew was never delivered? What if instead of it being the nephew's fiancee, the nephew sold it to a random third party, Jim. Assuming Jim had no actual, inquiry or record notice (since nephew's deed was recorded), would owner still have superior title than Jim, a BFP?