Thompson v. Spencer (1875) · DecisionDepot

Thompson v. Spencer

Name: California Superior Court Tentative Rulings
Creator: DecisionDepot
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

California Supreme Court Jul 1, 1875 No. No. 4381Published

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a quitclaim deed executed by a grantor after they had already divested their interest in the property conveys no title to the grantee. The original grant took effect by relation to the date of the initial order, rendering the subsequent deed ineffective.

Issues

Whether a quitclaim deed conveys title when the grantor has already divested their interest in the property.
Whether a deed delivered pursuant to a prior grant takes effect by relation to the date of the grant.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The quitclaim deed of Carillo made to Phillips on the 23d day of April, passed to the grantee the title to the premises in controversy.”

“The deed subsequently (on the 26th of April) delivered to Carillo pursuant to the grant, took effect by relation as of March the 30th”

Synopsis

Grant of Pueblo Lands.—If a town, as the successor in interest of a Hexican pueblo, owns the pueblo lands within its limits, and its board of trustees grants a block of said land to a petitioner for the same, and he then conveys the same by a quitclaim deed, and the board of trustees of the town afterwards make a conveyance to the grantor, the grantee acquires, by the quitclaim deed, the title to the premises as against a subsequent purchaser from the grantor. The deed of the board of trustees relates back to the date of the grant.

When Deed takes Effect bx Relation.—When the authorities of a town make a grant of a pueblo lot, and afterwards execute a deed, the -deed takes effect by relation as of the date of the grant.

By the Court: The quitclaim deed of Carillo made to Phillips on the 23d day of April, passed to the grantee the title to the premises in controversy. These premises had been already granted to Carillo by the board of trustees, by order duly entered in their records on the 30th day of March. The deed subsequently (on the 26th of April) delivered to Carillo pursuant to the grant, took effect by relation as of March the 30th, and vested the estate in him as of that day. The subsequent deed of Carillo, under which the plaintiff claims, and which was delivered by Carillo on the 5th day of January, 1874, therefore, conveyed nothing.

Judgment affirmed.

Thompson v. Spencer

AI Brief

Synopsis

More from California Supreme Court

Related research

AI Brief