[WSBARP] Possibility of Reverter

[Rowley, Rob]

My one case that I got to argue at the Supreme Court dealt with the
enforceability of fee simple determinable estates.

Alby v Banc One (2006)
https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=6610484979493170052&hl=en&as_sdt=6&as_vis=1&oi=scholarr

On Mon, Jan 30, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Roger Hawkes <Roger at law-hawks.com> wrote:

> Egads!!  Picking nits by title insurer.
>
>
>
> I would seek other insurer’s inputs; failing a change, then advise Buyer
> that it probably will impact a future sale or pledge by them; they can do a
> quiet title action, of course; and have the Sellers pay for cleaning it up?
>
>
>
> Roger Hawkes, WSBA 5173
>
> 19909 Ballinger Way NE
>
> Shoreline, WA 98155
>
> www.hawkeslawfirm.com
>
> 206 367 5000 voice
>
> 206 367 4005  fax
>
>
>
> *From:* Marc Holmes [mailto:marc at holmeslawgroup.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, January 30, 2017 4:22 PM
> *To:* 'WSBA Real Property Listserv'
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] Possibility of Reverter
>
>
>
> Mates,
>
>
>
> I have a client purchasing a single family home and an old deed showed up
> on title with a restriction against “carrying on a trade or business” on
> the property or else the property “immediately reverts to the grantors” who
> are long since dead.  I’ve been to the property and there is nothing there
> to suggest it’s been used for anything but a typical residence since the
> house was built in the 90s and the current owners have owned for more than
> 10 years.  However, they have registered two LLCs to using this property’s
> address.  When asked they said they have never operated a business on the
> property and that the LLCs are holding companies they own for two
> completely unrelated multifamily properties run by an outside property
> manager.  On the advice of their real estate agent, they signed and
> notarized a written statement to that effect.
>
>
>
> The sellers will be conveying by warranty deed and the title company is
> excepting the old deed from title policy.  Whether the old deed was
> sufficient to create a defeasible fee is debatable but assuming that it
> was, what more, if anything, should I do to look out for the buyers’
> interest?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Marc Holmes
>
> Holmes Law Group PLLC
>
> 808 5th Ave N
>
> Seattle WA 98109
>
> HolmesLawGroup.com <http://holmeslawgroup.com/>
>
> marc at holmeslawgroup.com
>
> Ofc: 206-357-4224
>
> Cell: 206-849-0853
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
>



-- 


*Robert R. Rowley*, Attorney at Law

7 S. Howard St., Suite 218

Spokane, WA  99201

T: (509) 252-5074

C: (509) 994-1143

F: (509) 928-3084

E: rob at rowleylegal.com

W: www.rowleylegal.com



Practice concentrated on business, real estate and general legal matters in
Washington and Idaho.



NOTICE: The contents of this message and any attachments may be protected
by the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine or other applicable
protections.  If you are not the intended recipient or have received this
message in error, please notify the sender and promptly delete the
message.  Thank you for your assistance.

DISCLAIMER: You should recognize that responses provided by e-mail means
are akin to ordinary telephone or face-to-face conversations and do not
reflect the level of factual or legal inquiry or analysis which would be
applied in the case of a formal legal opinion. A formal opinion may very
well reach a different conclusion.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20170130/f6f92c19/attachment.html>