Legal Question in Real Estate Law in California
Assuming subsequent grant deed described land as "Lot 80 of Tract No. 25877, as Per Map Recorded in Book 686 Page(s) 13 to 16, inclusive of maps, in the office of the county recorder of said county." However, the previous deed described land as "Lot 80 of Tract No. 25877, in the City of Lakewood, County of Los Angeles, as Per Map Recorded in Book 686 Page(s) 13 to 16, inclusive of maps, in the office of the county recorder of said county." Is the omission of the City of Lakewood, County of Los Angeles, makes the subsequent deed invalid? The subsequent deed nonetheless correctly stated the APN, and described the land as "More commonly known as followed by the right street address.
2 Answers from Attorneys
No. It is sloppy drafting, but the key elements of the description are the Lot number, the Tract number, the book and page numbers and the county. When those items match, and there is no conflicting information, just an omission, that is sufficient to create a valid legal description to transfer title.
I agree. Mr. McCormick is the expert on title and recording matters. Lawyers are usually taught to repeat exactly the wording of prior title descriptions, because it is safer and avoids errors and omissions; however, in the big picture, exact parroting of property descriptions is not required, All that is necessary is wording that unequivocally identifies a particular legal parcel.
Related Questions & Answers
Looking for something else?
10,200 active attorneys ready to answer your legal questions today.
Featured Attorneys
Earn additional revenue and grow your business.
