Schulte v. City of Detroit

Michigan Supreme Court
242 Mich. 152, 218 N.W. 690 (1928)

ELI5:

Rule of Law:

A purchaser of real property who takes from a bona fide purchaser for value without notice will be 'sheltered' by the grantor's good-faith status and take good title, even if the subsequent purchaser has actual or constructive notice of a prior adverse claim.

Facts:

On October 23, 1913, Michael J. Griffin conveyed a 10-foot strip of Lot 6 to the city of Detroit via a quitclaim deed, which the city did not record at the time.
On April 18, 1914, Griffin conveyed the entirety of Lot 6, without reservation, to Oliver E. Day, who paid full value and had no knowledge of the city's prior deed.
Day recorded his deed on May 5, 1914, thereby becoming a bona fide purchaser with superior title as against the city's unrecorded interest.
On June 22, 1914, Day conveyed the entire Lot 6 to the plaintiffs, who also paid full value without any actual knowledge of the city's claim.
On the same day that Day deeded the property to the plaintiffs (June 22, 1914), the city of Detroit recorded its 1913 deed from Griffin.
The plaintiffs recorded their deed from Day on July 9, 1914, and subsequently made valuable improvements on the property.
For over a decade, the city of Detroit levied general and special taxes on the plaintiffs for the entire lot without asserting its claim to the 10-foot strip.
On May 25, 1926, the city served the plaintiffs with a notice to remove encroachments from the 10-foot strip of land.

Procedural Posture:

The plaintiffs filed a bill in equity in the trial court against the city of Detroit to restrain the city from enforcing its claim and to quiet title to the disputed 10-foot strip of land.
The trial court issued a decree in favor of the plaintiffs, granting the requested relief.
The defendant, the city of Detroit, appealed the trial court's decree to the state's highest 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 purchaser of real property who may have constructive notice of a prior unrecorded interest take title free of that interest if their direct grantor was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice?

Opinions:

Majority - Fellows, J.

Yes, a purchaser takes title free of a prior interest if their grantor was a bona fide purchaser, regardless of the subsequent purchaser's own notice. The court's reasoning focused not on whether the plaintiffs had notice, but on the quality of the title they received from their grantor, Day. Because Day was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice, he acquired 'perfect title' superior to the city's unrecorded claim. The court held that a party with perfect title must be able to freely convey that same title to a subsequent buyer. To restrict this right would devalue the grantor's title. Citing established precedent, the court applied the 'shelter rule,' which protects a bona fide purchaser's ability to transfer their title by allowing their grantee to 'succeed to the rights of the latter.' This rule prevents a 'stagnation of property' and ensures that a bona fide purchaser can fully enjoy and alienate their property.

Analysis:

This decision solidifies the application of the 'shelter rule' in property law, which is a critical exception to the general principle that a purchaser with notice of a prior claim takes title subject to that claim. The ruling emphasizes that the purpose of recording statutes is not only to protect the immediate bona fide purchaser (BFP) but also to preserve the marketability of the BFP's title. By allowing a subsequent grantee to take shelter in their grantor's BFP status, the court ensures that the BFP is not left with an unmarketable property, as their pool of potential buyers would be limited to only those without notice. This precedent reinforces the stability and predictability of land titles by protecting the chain of title derived from a BFP.

Gunnerbot

AI-powered case assistant

Loaded: Schulte v. City of Detroit (1928)

Try: "What was the holding?" or "Explain the dissent"