⚡ 10-Second Rule
A deed moves land only if it's properly written and the giver truly means "yours now," not "maybe later."
🧒 ELI-10 Scene
Grandma Rose writes a card: "My piano is yours, Leo." She signs it. Then she locks the card in her desk drawer. Leo never sees it. Did Leo get the piano? No. Writing words is not the same as meaning them now. Months later, Grandma hands Leo the card at his recital. "It's yours today," she says. Now the gift is real. The handoff shows she meant it right then. Land works the same way. The paper matters, but the moment of truly letting go matters more.
⚖️ Actual Rule
A valid deed requires a writing signed by the grantor that identifies the grantor and grantee, contains words of present grant, and describes the land with reasonable certainty; consideration is not required, and recording is not required for validity between the parties. A deed transfers title only upon delivery: the grantor's manifested present intent that the deed be immediately operative. Physical handover is neither necessary nor sufficient — delivery is a question of intent. Delivery is presumed when the deed is recorded or is in the grantee's possession, and presumed absent when the grantor retains it; both presumptions are rebuttable by extrinsic evidence of intent. Under the majority rule, when a grantor hands the deed directly to the grantee subject to an oral condition, delivery is absolute and the condition is disregarded. By contrast, delivery to a third-party escrow with instructions to deliver upon a stated condition is valid, and title passes automatically when the condition occurs; where the escrow supports an enforceable written sale contract, the grantor cannot reclaim the deed. Acceptance is required but presumed when the conveyance benefits the grantee. Deed types differ in the promises they carry. A general warranty deed contains six covenants of title: the present covenants of seisin, right to convey, and against encumbrances, breached (if at all) at delivery and, in most states, not running to remote grantees; and the future covenants of quiet enjoyment, warranty, and further assurances, which run with the land and are breached only upon actual disturbance of possession by one with superior title. A special warranty deed warrants only against defects arising from the grantor's own acts. A quitclaim deed conveys whatever interest the grantor has, with no covenants. Under estoppel by deed, a grantor who conveys by warranty deed before owning the land passes title automatically upon later acquiring it; the doctrine does not apply to quitclaim deeds.
ELI-10 translation: a signed paper naming the land moves ownership the second the giver means "yours now."
🔍 Ask These Questions
- Is the deed valid — signed writing, named parties, granting words, land described? (Is there a signed paper saying who gives which land to whom?)
- Was there delivery — present intent to let go? (Did the giver mean "yours now," not "yours someday, maybe"?)
- Where does the paper sit — recorded, with the grantee, or in the giver's drawer? (The paper's location hints at what the giver really meant.)
- Handed straight to the grantee with spoken strings attached? (Whispered conditions snap off; a direct handoff is a complete handoff.)
- Handed to a neutral third party with instructions? (A trusted middleman can hold the paper until the condition happens.)
- Did the grantee accept? (Nobody must say yes out loud; the law assumes yes to a good deal.)
- Which deed type — and which promises ride along? (Warranty deeds carry six promises; quitclaim deeds carry none at all.)
⚠️ Bar Trap
Exam language: Examiners have the grantor hand the deed directly to the grantee while attaching an oral condition — "record only after graduation," "return it if I recover." Under the majority rule, delivery to the grantee is absolute and the parol condition is a nullity; students wrongly enforce the condition or find delivery failed. The mirror-image trap: the same condition is fully effective when the deed goes to a third-party escrow instead.
ELI-10: Watch whose hands take the paper. Handed straight to the receiver, spoken strings snap off. Handed to a middleman, the strings hold.
🧪 Question
Vera owned a lakeside cottage. She executed a deed, valid in form, naming her nephew Paul as grantee. At a family dinner, she handed Paul the deed and said, "The cottage is yours, but do not record this until you finish nursing school — and if you drop out, you must give it back." Paul recorded the deed the following week. A month later, he withdrew from nursing school. Vera sued to cancel the deed and quiet title in herself, relying on Paul's failure to satisfy the stated condition. The jurisdiction follows the majority rule on delivery.
Who should prevail?
(A) Vera, because Paul failed to satisfy the express condition attached to the delivery. (B) Paul, because handing him the deed effected delivery and the oral condition is disregarded. (C) Vera, because Paul gave no value for the conveyance. (D) Paul, because recording the deed conclusively established delivery.
Answer: (B). Vera manifested present intent by physically handing a facially complete deed to the named grantee, so delivery occurred at the dinner. Under the majority rule, an oral condition accompanying delivery directly to the grantee is a nullity, so title passed absolutely and Paul's withdrawal from school is irrelevant.
💡 Why the Wrong Answers Are Wrong
- (A) enforces a parol condition that the majority rule discards when the deed passes directly to the grantee rather than to an escrow.
- (C) demands consideration; a deed needs delivery and intent, not payment, so gratuitous conveyances are fully effective.
- (D) overstates recording's effect — recording raises only a rebuttable presumption of delivery, and here delivery was already complete before recording.
- ELI-10: The wrong idea is that spoken strings ride along with a handed-over deed. A direct handoff cuts every string.
