Salt Lake County v. Metro West Ready Mix, Inc.
89 P.3d 155 (2004)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A purchaser who obtains title through a 'wild deed'—a deed from a grantor who is a stranger to the record title—cannot be a bona fide purchaser under Utah's Recording Statute because they are on constructive notice of a defect in their grantor's title.
Facts:
- In 1878, William Turner conveyed a 15-acre property located in Utah County to Salt Lake County by warranty deed.
- Immediately after the conveyance, Salt Lake County recorded its deed in Salt Lake County, but failed to record it in Utah County where the property was situated.
- In 1989, Darhl and Roena Tingey, who claimed their family had possessed the property for decades but had no record title, were approached by Lamona Farms (Metro West's predecessor-in-interest).
- The Tingeys agreed to sell the property to Lamona Farms for $25,000 via a quitclaim deed.
- A title search of the Utah County records, conducted by Lamona Farms before the purchase, confirmed that the Tingeys were strangers to the record title and not listed as owners.
- Despite this knowledge, Lamona Farms purchased the property and recorded its quitclaim deed in Utah County on April 14, 1989.
- Lamona Farms later transferred the property to another entity, which eventually merged into Metro West.
- On June 17, 1998, approximately 120 years after acquiring the property, Salt Lake County recorded its original warranty deed in Utah County.
Procedural Posture:
- Salt Lake County filed an action to quiet title to the property against Metro West in the trial court.
- The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Metro West, ruling that it was a bona fide purchaser under Utah’s Recording Statute.
- Salt Lake County, as appellant, appealed the decision to the Utah Court of Appeals.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's ruling in favor of Metro West (appellee), creating and applying a new 'apparent title rule'.
- Salt Lake County petitioned for a writ of certiorari, which the Utah Supreme Court granted.
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 purchaser who obtains title to property through a wild deed, executed by a grantor with no record title, qualify as a 'good faith' subsequent purchaser protected under Utah’s Recording Statute against a prior, unrecorded interest?
Opinions:
Majority - Durrant, Associate Chief Justice
No, a purchaser who obtains title through a wild deed from a grantor outside the chain of record title cannot qualify as a 'good faith' purchaser protected by the recording statute. To be a 'subsequent purchaser in good faith' under Utah Code section 57-3-103, one must purchase without notice of any infirmity in the grantor's title. This notice can be actual, inquiry, or constructive. A purchaser is charged with constructive record notice not only of what is in the records, but also of what is not in the records—namely, a grantor's lack of any record title. A deed from a grantor who is a stranger to the record title is a 'wild deed.' By definition, a grantee of a wild deed is on notice of a fatal defect in the grantor's title. Therefore, such a purchaser cannot meet the good faith requirement of the recording statute and does not take free of a prior unrecorded interest simply by recording their wild deed first.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the importance of the chain of title and rejects the lower court's flexible 'apparent title rule,' which would have introduced uncertainty into property law by considering factors like possession. By holding that a wild deed automatically imputes notice of a title defect, the court reinforces a strict interpretation of the good faith requirement in a race-notice jurisdiction. This ruling serves as a clear warning to purchasers that they cannot ignore a seller's lack of record title; reliance on the public record is paramount, and buying from a stranger to that record is done at the purchaser's own peril. The decision ensures that recording statutes protect those who diligently trace and rely upon the record chain of title, not those who attempt to bypass it.
Unlock the full brief for Salt Lake County v. Metro West Ready Mix, Inc.