[WSBARP] The term "Convey" in a Quitclaim Deed

[David Faber]

Thank you all!

I just spoke with the title officer involved and they will accept the deed
as written because their underwriters agreed the term "convey" is a
redundancy and is unnecessary, thankfully. That said, this experience will
probably cause me to return to using the phrase "convey and" in any deeding
instrument just to ensure we avoid confusion, which I find grating because
I like to eliminate duplicative language in my legal documents.

Thank you again!

Best,
David J. Faber
Faber Feinson PLLC
210 Polk Street, Suite 1
Port Townsend, WA 98368
(360) 379-4110

*** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in
error, and destroy the copy you received.***


On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 10:59 AM Lenard Wittlake <lwlaw at my180.net> wrote:

> “grant and convey” is not in the WA statutes on deed forms.  So if that
> satisfies “substantial” then quitclaim should suffice.  See also Black’s
> Law Dictionary definition of quitclaim.  QC deeds as described by Mr. Faber
> are common (or were common at least until the 80’s) in MT.
>
>
>
> BTW “grant” typically includes warranties which is the opposite of
> quitclaim. See, for example, a grant deed in CA.
>
>
>
> I typically use the statutory forms to avoid such issues.
>
>
>
> Lenard L Wittlake, PLLC
>
> Attorney & Counselor at Law
>
> 22 East Poplar Street, Suite 202
>
> P.O. Box 1233
>
> Walla Walla, WA 99362
>
> (509) 529-1529 voice
>
> (509) 850-3515 fax
>
> Lenard at wittlakelaw.com
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com [mailto:
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com] *On Behalf Of *Craig Sjostrom
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 7, 2020 10:10 AM
> *To:* 'WSBA Real Property Listserv'
> *Subject:* Re: [WSBARP] The term "Convey" in a Quitclaim Deed
>
>
>
> I’ve had a similar problem recently, I had a title co. insist that I have
> a boundary adjustment quitclaim deed include “grant and convey”, which I
> didn’t think was necessary, but since it hadn’t been recorded yet it was no
> biggie.
>
>
>
> Craig
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message contains information belonging
> to the Law Office of Craig Sjostrom, which may be privileged, confidential
> and/or protected from disclosure.  The information is intended only for the
> use of the individual or entity named above.  If you believe that you have
> received this message in error, please be so kind as to contact the sender
> and delete the message.  If you are not the intended recipient, any
> dissemination, distribution or copying is strictly prohibited. Thank you.
>
> >
>
> > Law Office of Craig Sjostrom, 1204 Cleveland Ave., Mount Vernon, WA
> 98273  Phone (360) 848-0339  Fax (360) 336-3488 email
> cdsjostrom at comcast.net
>
>
>
> *From:* wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com <
> wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *David Faber
> *Sent:* Tuesday, July 07, 2020 9:48 AM
> *To:* wsbarp <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] The term "Convey" in a Quitclaim Deed
>
>
>
> RCW 64.04.050 says that a quitclaim deed must be in "substantially" the
> form described. I'm currently getting pushback from a title company on a
> quitclaim deed that did not include the word "convey" (reading instead "[x]
> does hereby quitclaim to [y] all title in . . ..") Though a "conveyance", I
> can see no substantial reason in law to require the use of both the terms
> "convey" and "quitclaim" in a valid deed, nor can I find any literature on
> point that suggests otherwise. I'd very much like to avoid eating the cost
> of re-recording here, plus this seems like a good opportunity to improve my
> practice. Can anyone speak to this point, either to confirm I'm correct or
> give me authority that clearly says I'm incorrect? It seems that both
> efficiency and clarity makes the use of the term "convey" superfluous.
>
>
> Best,
>
> David J. Faber
>
> Faber Feinson PLLC
>
> 210 Polk Street, Suite 1
>
> Port Townsend, WA 98368
> (360) 379-4110
>
>
>
> *** NOTICE: ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION - PRIVILEGED & CONFIDENTIAL.
> This communication may contain privileged or other confidential
> information. If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that
> you have received this communication in error, please do not print,
> copy, retransmit, disseminate, or otherwise use the information. Also,
> please indicate to the sender that you have received this communication in
> error, and destroy the copy you received.***
> ***Disclaimer: Please note that RPPT listserv participation is not
> restricted to practicing attorneys and may include non-practicing
> attorneys, law students, professionals working in related fields, and
> others.***
>
> _______________________________________________
> WSBARP mailing list
> WSBARP at lists.wsbarppt.com
> http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/wsbarp
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20200707/3d731227/attachment.html>