Clevenger v. Moore
126 Okla. 246, 259 P. 219, 1927 OK 260 (1927)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A deed delivered from an escrow agent to the grantee without the performance of the conditions of the escrow agreement is void and conveys no title, even to a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value.
Facts:
- Clevenger agreed to a potential trade of her Bartlesville property for property owned by Simmons in Tulsa.
- Clevenger executed a deed for her property and placed it in escrow with an agent, Peay, under the strict verbal condition that it not be delivered until she inspected the Tulsa property and approved the trade.
- After inspecting the Tulsa property, Clevenger was dissatisfied and immediately informed Peay and Simmons that she would not proceed with the trade.
- Clevenger repeatedly demanded that Peay return her deed, but he failed to do so.
- Without Clevenger's knowledge or consent, and in violation of the escrow condition, Peay delivered the deed to Simmons.
- Simmons recorded the deed, took possession of the property, and subsequently sold it to Moore.
- Moore, believing Simmons was the rightful owner after examining public records, purchased the property in good faith and for valuable consideration.
- Clevenger never received any payment or property in exchange for her Bartlesville property.
Procedural Posture:
- Clevenger filed suit in the trial court against J. D. Simmons and D. F. Moore for possession of the property and cancellation of two deeds.
- The defendants answered, with Moore asserting he was a bona fide purchaser for value.
- The case was tried before a jury.
- At the close of Clevenger's evidence, the trial court sustained the defendants' demurrer to the evidence and dismissed the action.
- Clevenger, as the appellant, appealed the trial court's judgment.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a deed that is wrongfully delivered from escrow, without the grantor's fulfillment of the required conditions, convey valid title to a subsequent bona fide purchaser for value who buys from the grantee?
Opinions:
Majority - Diffendaffer, C.
No. A deed wrongfully delivered from escrow without the performance of its underlying conditions is void and conveys no title. A deed does not operate to convey title until it is delivered by the grantor or someone duly authorized by them. When a deed held in escrow is obtained by the grantee without the performance of the conditions upon which delivery was to be made, no title passes because there has been no valid delivery. The court distinguishes this situation from one where delivery is procured through fraud against the grantor; in such a case, the deed may be merely voidable. Here, the delivery was unauthorized and without the grantor's consent, which is akin to theft of the deed. Because the deed to Simmons was void ab initio, he acquired no title and therefore could pass no title to Moore, regardless of Moore's status as an innocent purchaser for value.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the critical distinction between a void and a voidable deed in the context of escrow arrangements. It establishes a strong, protective rule for grantors, holding that an unauthorized delivery from escrow is a nullity that cannot be cured by a subsequent good-faith purchase. This places the risk of loss squarely on the subsequent purchaser, who must seek recourse against their fraudulent grantor rather than the original, innocent owner. The ruling solidifies the principle that one cannot convey better title than one has, and a void deed confers no title to convey.
