Darby Suiter v. Kegham S. Gregory et al.

Summary

The court addressed whether a purchaser was entitled to the return of $500 in earnest money after rejecting a title insurer's commitment containing multiple exceptions and qualifications. It held that the commitment did not satisfy the sale contract's unqualified title-guaranty condition, affirmed judgment for the purchaser, and upheld an attorney-fee award to the stakeholder title company.

Holdings

1. The owner's title policy commitment did not satisfy the contract because it contained substantial qualifications and exclusions that were not authorized by the sales agreement.
2. Gregory was entitled to recover the $500 earnest-money deposit because the title-guaranty condition had not been satisfied.
3. The stakeholder was properly awarded attorney's fees; payment of the title-guaranty expense by Gregory did not make Stewart Title his agent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Stewart Title Guaranty Company's qualified owner's title policy commitment satisfied the sales contract's requirement that title be guaranteed to the purchaser.
2. Whether Gregory was entitled to return of the $500 earnest-money deposit after rejecting the qualified title commitment.
3. Whether Stewart Title Guaranty Company was entitled to attorney's fees despite being the stakeholder in the transaction.

Disposition

affirmed