[WSBARP] Easement with no original conveyance of record

[Ryan P. Coon]

To answer your question Eric, the situation is actual more complicated 
than I explained, there's a third parcel seeking to use the easement 
(the third parcel is also burdened by the easement described in the real 
estate contract). Our dispute is with that third parcel and we're 
primarily focused on the third parcels lack of rights to the purported 
easement, but we're exploring other possible avenues such as whether the 
easement was ever validly created to begin with.

Very Truly Yours,

Ryan P. Coon

Law Office of Cole & Gilday, P.C.

//

10101 - 270th St. NW

Stanwood, WA 98292

(360) 629-2900 (Telephone)

(360) 629-0220 (Fax)

This message contains confidential and privileged information that is 
intended only for the named recipient(s).Unless you are the named 
recipient or authorized agent thereof, you are prohibited from reading, 
copying, distributing or otherwise disseminating such information.If you 
receive this communication in error, please notify the sender immediately.

On 1/27/2021 4:20 PM, Eric Nelsen wrote:
>
> I think Buyer has proper title to Parcel A with an easement over 
> Parcel B, assuming the recorded Real Estate Contract is valid and 
> properly describes Parcel A and creates the easement over Parcel B. 
> But what is Buyer intending to do, that prompts the question if 
> Buyer’s title is good? If Buyer intends to sell and the contract isn’t 
> paid off, then I would expect them to sell via something like LPO 
> 14-05, “Deed & Purchaser’s Assignment of Contract.”
>
> https://www.wsba.org/for-legal-professionals/join-the-legal-profession-in-wa/limited-practice-officers/lpo-forms 
> <https://www.wsba.org/for-legal-professionals/join-the-legal-profession-in-wa/limited-practice-officers/lpo-forms>
>
> On the other hand, if the contract is paid off, then it would be best 
> to first get a fulfillment deed from the Seller so the contract terms 
> are cleared and Buyer has full title, and then Buyer can sell on a 
> standard PSA and convey via an ordinary warranty deed.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Eric
>
> Eric C. Nelsen
>
> Sayre Law Offices, PLLC
>
> 1417 31st Ave South
>
> Seattle WA 98144-3909
>
> 206-625-0092
>
> eric at sayrelawoffices.com <mailto:eric at sayrelawoffices.com>
>
> *Covid-19 Update - *All attorneys are working remotely during regular 
> business hours and are available via email and by phone. 
> Videoconferencing also is available. Signing of estate planning 
> documents can be completed and will be handled on a case-by-case 
> basis. Please direct mail and deliveries to the Seattle office.
>
> *From:*wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com 
> <wsbarp-bounces at lists.wsbarppt.com> *On Behalf Of *Ryan P. Coon
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 27, 2021 3:57 PM
> *To:* WSBA Real Property Listserv <wsbarp at lists.wsbarppt.com>
> *Subject:* [WSBARP] Easement with no original conveyance of record
>
> List-mates,
>
> Bit of a complicated question that I can't seem to find an answer on...
>
> /Seller /owns two adjacent parcels, Parcels A and B. Real estate 
> contract recorded (but no deed that we can find) where /Seller/ agrees 
> to sell Parcel A including an easement over parcel B to /Buyer/. 
> Despite no recorded deed, the parties subsequently act as if 
> conveyance took place (/Buyer/ deeds Parcel A w/ the easement to a 
> Third party who in turn deeds the same Parcel A w/ easement to another 
> party, so on and so forth).
>
> Without a recorded deed what is the status of the title to Parcel B? 
> Is /Buyers/ line of title good? Or would title go to /Seller/ and 
> /Sellers heirs/? If Buyers line of title is good, does that include 
> the easement?
>
> We represent the subsequent owner of Parcel B (the parcel burdened by 
> the possible easement) and we're trying to determine if the easement 
> was ever actually granted or conveyed. Any insight would be much 
> appreciated.
>
> -- 
>
> Very Truly Yours,
>
> Ryan P. Coon
>
> Law Office of Cole & Gilday, P.C.
>
> //
>
> 10101 - 270th St. NW
>
> Stanwood, WA 98292
>
> (360) 629-2900 (Telephone)
>
> (360) 629-0220 (Fax)
>
> This message contains confidential and privileged information that is 
> intended only for the named recipient(s).  Unless you are the named 
> recipient or authorized agent thereof, you are prohibited from 
> reading, copying, distributing or otherwise disseminating such 
> information.  If you receive this communication in error, please 
> notify the sender immediately.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/wsbarp/attachments/20210127/b2c5e129/attachment.html>