Kohlbrand v. Ranieri
2005 Ohio 295, 159 Ohio App. 3d 140, 823 N.E. 2d 76 (2005)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A grantor who provides a general warranty deed promising to convey title that is 'clear, free and unincumbered' and to defend against 'all claims of all persons whomsoever' is obligated to defend and indemnify the grantee against claims arising from an undisclosed encumbrance, as these terms are interpreted to mean a title completely free from such claims.
Facts:
- In 1955, Monfort Supply Company purchased a parcel of land subject to a recorded oil pipeline easement held by Mid-Valley Pipeline Co.
- The deed recording the pipeline easement contained a typographical error, listing it in Deed Book 2382 but referencing it as being in Deed Book 2832.
- Monfort subdivided the land for single-family homes.
- In 1986, Monfort sold a lot from this subdivision to the Ranieris.
- The deed from Monfort to the Ranieris warranted the title was 'Clear, Free and Unincumbered' and that Monfort would 'Defend the same against all claims of all persons whomsoever.'
- This deed did not mention the pipeline easement, though it did refer to a plat that incorrectly cited the easement's location in Deed Book 2832.
- In 2001, the Ranieris sold the lot to Gerald and Deborah Kohlbrand, whose deed also made no mention of the pipeline easement.
- Shortly after their purchase, the Kohlbrands discovered the existence of the Mid-Valley pipeline easement on their property.
Procedural Posture:
- Gerald and Deborah Kohlbrand sued the Ranieris in the trial court for fraudulent nondisclosure of the pipeline easement.
- The Ranieris filed a third-party complaint against their grantor, Monfort Supply Company, claiming Monfort was obligated to indemnify and defend them based on the general warranty in their deed.
- The Ranieris, as third-party plaintiffs, moved for summary judgment against Monfort on the limited issue of its duty to defend and indemnify.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Ranieris.
- Monfort Supply Company, as third-party defendant-appellant, appealed the grant of summary judgment to the intermediate appellate court.
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 grantor who warrants a title as 'Clear, Free and Unincumbered' and promises to 'Defend the same against all claims of all persons whomsoever' have a duty to defend and indemnify the grantee against a claim arising from an undisclosed pipeline easement?
Opinions:
Majority - Painter, J.
Yes. A grantor who warrants a title is 'clear, free and unincumbered' and promises to defend against all claims has a duty to defend and indemnify the grantee against claims from undisclosed easements. The terms 'clear,' 'free,' and 'unincumbered' are redundant and mean the same thing: a title free from any encumbrances. Monfort's warranty was absolute and did not contain an exception for the pipeline easement. If Monfort wished to be excluded from liability for the easement, it should have been explicitly stated in the deed's warranty clause. The court rejected Monfort's argument that a 'free and clear' title is a lesser standard than a 'clear' title, labeling such distinctions as 'unnecessary lawyerisms' stemming from the Norman Conquest. Because an easement is an encumbrance, Monfort breached its warranty by failing to convey a title free from it and is therefore obligated to defend the Ranieris.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the principle that general warranties in deeds are to be interpreted by their plain and broad meaning, placing the burden on grantors to explicitly list any exceptions. It strongly rejects attempts to create distinctions between historically redundant legal terms like 'clear' and 'free,' promoting clarity and discouraging reliance on arcane legalese to evade obligations. By expressly repudiating the contrary holding in Zilka v. Cent. S. Ltd., the court provides clear guidance in its jurisdiction that a general warranty against encumbrances is a powerful guarantee that will be strictly enforced as written on the face of the deed.
