This really happened. A man entered into a contract to sell a piece of property. He signed the contract as an individual, but the man actually "owned" the property as a Trustee of a nominee trust of which he was one of several beneficiaries. The Seller reneged on the sale. The Buyer moved for specific perfromance; and the court found that while the Buyer may be able to collect damages from the man who signed the sales agreement, there was no ability to require a conveyance, because he hadn't signed the contact as Trustee of the trust. Doesn't seem fair, does it?
I have a situation that I am currently working on where a woman signed an offer to purchase. Because I have found it prudent to do so, I have looked at the deed on record. The Grantees are the woman and her husband, as husband and wife, tenants by the entirety. There is no deed into the wife at the Registry. Because I have these clues, i will examine the Probate files to determine whether the divorce decree directed that the property be conveyed to the wife. Maybe, it is conveyed with some conditions. My point is that I really do need to know these things before I go much further on this matter.
I direct you to a post i have recently written on my firm's Topkins & Bevans blog (http://blog.topbev.com/?p=48). That post suggests the wisdom of having your attorney or title person check out the "record ownership" immeditelely after you sign an The money you or your client spends on this early exercise can save you much more down the road.
Comments (1)Subscribe to CommentsComment