What is a deed?
A deed is a written instrument that conveys legal and equitable title to real property—the legal term is a “fee simple” interest, meaning the highest level of ownership. “An absolute or ‘fee simple’ estate is one entitling the owner to the benefits of that estate during his life and descending to his heirs, devisees, and legal representatives on his death. One can own a fee simple estate in both legal and equitable property interests.” Jackson v. Wildflower Prod. Co., 505 S.W.3d 80, 88 (Tex.App.—Amarillo 2016, pet. denied).
A deed (a conveyance) should be distinguished from a contract (a mere promise to convey). “A purchaser takes title to real property solely through a deed. An instrument that does not operate as a present conveyance of title to real property is a contract to convey rather than a deed.” Smith v. Davis, No. 12-12-00169-CV, 2013 WL 2424266 (Tex.App.—Tyler 2013, no pet.).
It is difficult to imagine a more important document to the real estate investor than a deed, and yet its preparation is often left to a title company attorney who represents neither buyer nor seller and has no incentive to produce anything other than a basic boilerplate form. This is true even though Property Code Section 5.022(b) expressly states that “the parties to a conveyance may insert any clause . . . not in contravention of law.” So the Property Code expressly grants a measure of flexibility that is (unfortunately) seldom used in residential transactions.
Title company deeds lack clauses that can add significant value for the seller or buyer. Why is this so? Because it is not the job of the title company or its attorney to protect the interests of either party. Protecting those interests is the job of the attorneys for the respective parties. Problem is, buyers and sellers who are unrepresented by counsel forego the opportunity to include useful and advantageous deed clauses that are perfectly legitimate and acceptable if only one requested them. Obvious examples would be an “as is” clause to protect a seller from post-closing lawsuits and an assignments clause to ensure that a buyer acquires all warranties and maintenance contracts associated with the property.
A deed is not limited to simple “sell, bargain, and convey” language with general or special warranties. It can also include custom clauses and agreements and, if executed by both parties (not only by the grantor as in the usual case), it becomes a contract as well as a conveyance. This can be vital if the transaction involves special provisions and agreements upon which the parties are relying. Given that Texas courts have a distinct preference for construing the meaning of a deed according to its express language—i.e., “within the four corners” of the document—appropriate customization of the deed can go a long way toward accomplishing the goals of the parties.
Not being concerned with the content of the deed that one either gives or receives at closing is a flagrant dereliction of one’s own best interests.
A warranty deed, a real estate lien note, and a deed of trust are the three principal legal documents in most Texas residential real estate transactions.
This article briefly describes different types of deeds commonly used in connection with residential transactions. It is deliberately organized in pragmatic fashion for real-world practitioners and is not intended as a comprehensive academic review of the topic.
Minimum Requirements for a Texas Deed
There is no standard form for a deed although Property Code Section 5.022(a) offers a simple form that may be used for conveyances. Texas does have certain rules that apply if a deed is to be valid. For instance, the parties should be named, the intent to convey property must be clear from the wording, the property must be sufficiently described, and the deed must be signed by the grantor and delivered to the grantee. Gordon v. W. Hous. Trees, Ltd., 352 S.W.3d 32 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.). Having said this, it is not true that all deeds are created equal. In particular, when a grantor intends to accomplish a specific objective and limit liability in doing so, the wording of a deed can be critically important.
Technical wording is not required. “For a deed or instrument to effect conveyance of real property, it is not necessary to have all the formal parts of a deed formerly recognized at common law or to contain technical words. If, from the whole instrument, a grantor and grantee can be ascertained, and if there are operative words of grant showing an intention of the grantor to convey title to a real property interest to the grantee, and if the instrument is signed and acknowledged by the grantor, it is a deed which is legally effective as a conveyance.” Harlan v. Vetter, 732 S.W.2d 390 (Tex.App.—Eastland 1987, writ ref’d n.r.e.). If there is a signed written document that identifies a grantor and grantee, provides a reasonably accurate description of the property, and clearly contains the intention to convey, then that document is a “deed” under Texas law. Green v. Cannon, 33 S.W.3d 855,858 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. denied).
In the event of ambiguity or controversy, the goal of a court in interpreting a deed is “ascertaining and effectuating the parties’ intent . . . by conducting a careful and detailed examination of the deed in its entirety.” Wenske v. Ealy. 521 S.W.3d 791, 792 (Tex. 2017).
A deed conveys fee simple title “unless the estate is limited by express words or unless a lesser estate is conveyed or devised by construction or operation of law.” Prop. Code Sec. 5.001.
A deed can only convey what the grantor owns and no more. This is true even if the deed “purports to transfer a greater right or estate in the property.” Prop. Code Sec. 5.003.
“In Texas, deeds are construed to confer upon the grantee the greatest estate that the terms of the instrument will allow. A deed will pass whatever interest the grantor has in the land, unless it contains language showing the intention to grant a lesser estate.” Parker v. Jordan, 632 S.W.3d 108 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2021, affirmed by the Texas Supreme Court Dec. 20, 2022).
Although “[w]ords previously necessary at common law to transfer a fee simple estate are not necessary” according to Property Code Section 5.001, it is almost always the case that a Texas deed will include traditional wording such as “bargain, grant, sell, and convey” in order to make it clear that the parties intend to convey title. Texas law then honors that intention.
Must deeds show the actual purchase price?
No. In fact, in Texas, it is customary to recite that the consideration paid is “ten dollars and other valuable consideration.” Confidentiality is the reason. While recording gives the public notice that a transaction has occurred, and therefore preserves the integrity of the chain of title, it is Texas tradition that it is not the public’s business what the purchase price was. Of course, the parties can always choose to show the actual price if they wish.
The Texas rule is that a property description in a deed is sufficient if it identifies the property with reasonable accuracy. Morrow v. Shotwell, 477 S.W.2d 538 (Tex. 1972). A title “examiner should ascertain that the description in the instruments involved in a chain of title sufficiently describes the land so that it can be identified and located on the ground with reasonable certainty.” Comments to Standard 5.10, Texas Title Examination Standards.
Having said that, no prudent buyer should be satisfied unless the legal description is precisely correct and corresponds to previous descriptions in the chain of title. Assuring that this is the case should be part of the buyer’s due diligence process during the option period.
In some cases lengthy metes and bounds are used to describe the property rather than the usual lot and block descriptions commonly found in residential subdivisions. These need to be evaluated carefully by a prospective buyer. If a legal description is outdated, or if there is any doubt as to its present accuracy (e.g., it refers to an “old oak tree for corner” or a “stream for boundary”), then a new survey would be a good investment.
If the deed for some reason refers to more than one description of the property, and there is a conflict, then the more specific metes-and-bounds description controls. Stribling v. Millican DPC Partners, LP, 458 S.W.3d 17 (Tex. 2015).
It is not required that the street address of the property be included in the deed, and there is a rather obtuse resistance on the part of some real estate lawyers to doing this. In our view, it is certainly the better practice to include the full street address. As a practical matter, this makes it easier for investors with multiple properties to determine which deed goes with which property.
A caveat concerning legal descriptions obtained from an appraisal district: these are typically abbreviated and condensed and may not be the official legal description of the property as shown in the county clerk’s real property records. Two different computer systems are involved. The legal description in a new deed should track the description (lot and block or metes and bounds) in the prior deed on file with the county clerk—corrected, if necessary—in order to preserve proper chain of title.
Absent an express reservation to the contrary, legal descriptions in Texas deeds are presumed to also include and convey omitted narrow strips of land that should logically be included in the conveyance, given the nature of the property, and which would otherwise have little utility to the grantor. This is the “strips-and-gores” doctrine. Strait v. Savannah Court Partnership, 576 S.W. 3d 802 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2019, pet. denied). Another presumption is the centerline presumption, which states that a landowner is presumed to have ownership of the soil all the way to the centerline of an adjoining street (subject to the public’s right of passage), even if the legal description in the landowner’s deed does not specifically extend that far. As with the strips-and-gores doctrine, this presumption is rebuttable by evidence that the parties clearly intended a different outcome.
Legal descriptions can evolve over time. “While any title is only as good as the weakest link the chain of descriptions, practical considerations justify reliance upon corrections or improved land descriptions appearing in later conveyances and upon the passage of time if no apparent difficulties have arisen from a less than perfect land description.” Pickett v. Bishop, 223 S.W.2d 222 (Tex. 1949).
Reservations and Exceptions
Property Code Section 5.001 provides that a deed conveys a fee simple interest in property (i.e., all of the rights to the property, without exceptions or reservations) “unless the estate is limited by express words or unless a lesser estate is conveyed or devised by construction or operation of law.” Modern deed formats usually refer to whether or not there are reservations and exceptions. These should either be expressly mentioned if they exist or “none” should be inserted in that space.
Generally, Texas law construes deeds in order to confer upon the grantee the greatest estate that the terms of the instrument will allow. Both reservations and exceptions in deeds must be clear and specific. Courts will not find reservations or exceptions by implication. Rahlek, Ltd. v. Wells, 587 S.W.3d 57 (Tex.App.—Eastland 2019, pet. denied).
A note on terminology: “The primary distinction between a reservation and exception is that a reservation must always be in favor and [held back] for the benefit of the grantor; whereas an exception is a mere exclusion from the grant. . . .” Pich v. Lankford, 302 S.W.2D 645 (Tex. 1957). In other words, a reservation retains a certain interest in the grantor (e.g., minerals, an easement, or a life estate); by contrast, an exception stipulates that a certain interest is simply not conveyed at all, regardless of who may be the owner of it. Such language must be clear; an implied exception or reservation is not good enough. Griswold v. EOG Resources, Inc., 459 S.W.3d 713 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2015, no pet.). Reservations and exceptions affect the total package of rights and interests a buyer is getting, so investors should consult an attorney and place close attention to the wording.
The Doctrine of After-Acquired Title
Another item relating to the timing of conveyances is the doctrine of after-acquired title. If I give you a deed today to property that I do not yet own, it of course has no effect; but if I acquire that same property next week then the deed I previously gave you comes to life and the property is yours. This doctrine is also broadly known as estoppel by deed, which means that “all parties to a deed are bound by the recitals therein, which operate as an estoppel, working on the interest in the land if it be a deed of conveyance, and binding both parties. . . . Estoppel by deed or contract precludes parties to a valid instrument from denying its force and effect.” Sauceda v. Kerlin, 164 S.W.3d 892 (Tex.App.—Corpus Christi 2005), rev’d on other grounds, 263 S.W.3d 920 (Tex. 2008).
EXECUTION, DELIVERY, AND RECORDING
Signing, Dating, and Delivering the Deed
“A conveyance of an interest in real property must: (1) be in writing, (2) be signed by the grantor, and (3) be delivered to the grantee.” Prop. Code Sec. 5.021. A deed must be delivered (actually or constructively) in order to be effective (Prop. Code Sec. 5.021).
“Manual delivery of the deed is not, however, required. The test is not physical possession, but whether the grantor gave grantee control of the deed.” This may be accomplished by means of delivery through a third person. Wheatley v. Farley, 610 S.W.3d 511 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2020, no pet.).
“Conveyance by deed requires delivery of the deed. Delivery of a deed has two elements: (1) the grantor must place the deed within the control of the grantee (2) with the intention that the instrument become operative as a conveyance. The question of delivery of the deed is controlled by the intent of the grantor, and it is determined by examining all the facts and circumstances preceding, attending, and following the execution of the instrument.” Chambers v. Equity Bank, 319 S.W.3d 892 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 2010, no pet.).
Intention is a critical component of the delivery requirement. A showing that a deed was executed and delivered with an intent to convey the property is sufficient to establish that the deed vested title in the grantee. Stephens County Museum, Inc. v. Swenson, 17 S.W.2d 257, 261-62 (Tex. 1975).
Proof that a deed was recorded creates a presumption of and establishes a prima facie case of delivery and intent by the grantor to convey the land. Troxel v. Bishop, 201 S.W.3d 290, 297 (Tex.App.—Dallas 2006, no pet.). Both cases are cited with approval in Watson v. Tipton, 274 S.W.3d 791 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 2008, pet. denied).
A deed need not be dated in order to be effective, although it is clearly a better practice to do so. If the deed lacks a date or recites an impossible date then it will take effect as of the date of delivery. Webb v. Huff, 61 Tex. 677 (1884).
Delivery and the Presumption of Acceptance
When a grantor transfers property, title to the property vests in the grantee upon execution and delivery of the deed. The grantee’s acceptance is not usually indicated anywhere on the document. Acceptance (express or implied) is generally presumed.
“[A] deed which is not accepted by the grantee does not convey any interest in the land.” Martin v. Uvalde Sav. and Loan Ass’n, 773 S.W.2d 808 (Tex.App. 1989).
Must deeds be recorded to be valid?
An original deed may be recorded in the real property records if it is signed and acknowledged by the grantor. However, there is no requirement that a deed be recorded in order to be valid—only that it be executed and delivered to the grantee, at which time the transfer is fully effective between the grantor and the grantee.
“In Texas, it is settled that title to real property will vest upon execution and delivery of the deed. . . . The recording of the deed is not necessary to pass title. . . . The recording, however, establishes a prima facie case of delivery and the accompanying presumption that the grantor intended to convey the land according to the terms of the deed. . . . Although equitable title to real property passes at the time a deed is delivered, a delay in recording of the deed leaves open the possibility that the prior owner could illegally purport to convey the same property to a different purchaser. . . . This possibility arises because the prior owner still appears to be the current, legal owner when the subsequent purchaser searches the public record. . . . In such a case, of course, both purchasers would claim title to the property. . . . Texas law settles such a dispute over competing deeds in favor of the first to record, even where the first to record is a subsequent purchaser, as long as such deed holder qualifies as a subsequent purchaser for value pursuant to Section 13.001(a) of the Property Code. See Prop. Code Sec. 13.001(a) stating that an unrecorded conveyance in real property is ‘void as to a creditor or to a subsequent purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice.’ Even so, with regard to the prior unrecorded deed, section 13.001(b) further provides that the unrecorded instrument remains binding on a party to that instrument, on the party’s heirs, and on a subsequent purchaser who does not pay a valuable consideration or who has notice of the instrument.” Thompson v. Six Shooter Enterprises, LLC, 633 S.W.3d 107 (Tex.App.—El Paso 2021, no pet.).
Recording a deed makes it easier for title companies to research and insure the chain of title. Title companies insist on recording for this reason. Recording also informs the taxing authorities where ad valorem tax bills should be sent.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, executing and delivering a deed without immediately recording it can be a useful, inexpensive estate planning device—sometimes called “the deed in the drawer.” If, for example, a parent wants to insure that property is transferred to a child without probate or other difficulty, then he or she can sign and deliver a deed with the intention that it be held (unrecorded) until death. This is an entirely legal technique that has been used for ages. Note that there is another and better option in this area—the transfer on death deed (TODD), a recordable instrument, explained below.
Must the grantor’s signature be notarized?
A deed must be properly acknowledged and notarized if it is to be recorded in the county clerk’s real property records (statutory recording requirements for this are found primarily in Property Code Chapters 12 and 13). However, as between a grantor and grantee, deeds are valid even if the signature of the grantor is not acknowledged before a notary. Haile v. Holtzclaw, 414 S.W.2d 916, 928 (Tex. 1967). In other words, notarization may be necessary for recording in the county clerk’s office, but an unnotarized deed is still valid as a conveyance if the above-mentioned core requirements have been met.
The Texas Recording Statute
Texas is considered a “notice state” for recording purposes, meaning that recording an instrument with the county clerk both gives notice to the world of the transfer and establishes priority in the event an unscrupulous seller attempts to convey the property twice. “Recorded instruments in a grantee’s chain of title generally establish an irrebuttable presumption of notice.” Noble Mortg. & Invs. v. D&M Vision Invs., 340 S.W.3d 65, 76 (Tex.App—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, no pet.).
Being a “notice state” is contrasted with the old common-law rule of “first-in-time first-in-right.” The latter rule prevailed in historical times because there was no central registry of real property transactions. Property Code Section 13.001 et seq. (known as the recording statute) states:
Section 13.001. VALIDITY OF UNRECORDED INSTRUMENT. (a) A conveyance of real property or an interest in real property or a mortgage or deed of trust is void as to a creditor or to a subsequent purchaser for a valuable consideration without notice unless the instrument has been acknowledged, sworn to, or proved and filed for record as required by law. (b) The unrecorded instrument is binding on a party to the instrument, on the party’s heirs, and on a subsequent purchaser who does not pay a valuable consideration or who has notice of the instrument. (c) This section does not apply to a financing statement, a security agreement filed as a financing statement, or a continuation statement filed for record under the Business & Commerce Code.
Section 13.002. EFFECT OF RECORDED INSTRUMENT. An instrument that is properly recorded in the proper county is: (1) notice to all persons of the existence of the instrument; and (2) subject to inspection by the public.
Thus while recording may not be required, in a notice state such as Texas it is generally a good idea.
In counties where it is allowed, Texas authorizes electronic filing pursuant to the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (Bus. & Com Code Sec. 322.001-21).
Use of a Power of Attorney to Execute a Deed
Generally, according to the Estates Code, property transactions involving the use of a power of attorney require that the POA be recorded in the county clerk’s real property records within 30 days of the date the deed is recorded:
Estates Code Sec. 751.151. RECORDING FOR REAL PROPERTY TRANSACTIONS REQUIRING EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF INSTRUMENTS. A durable power of attorney for a real property transaction requiring the execution and delivery of an instrument that is to be recorded, including a release, assignment, satisfaction, mortgage, including a reverse mortgage, security agreement, deed of trust, encumbrance, deed of conveyance, oil, gas, or other mineral lease, memorandum of a lease, lien, including a home equity lien, or other claim or right to real property, must be recorded in the office of the county clerk of the county in which the property is located not later than the 30th day after the date the instrument is filed for recording.
It therefore makes sense to draft powers of attorney in recordable form, including the usual statutory recording notice at the top: NOTICE OF CONFIDENTIALITY RIGHTS: IF YOU ARE A NATURAL PERSON, YOU MAY REMOVE OR STRIKE ANY OR ALL OF THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION FROM ANY INSTRUMENT THAT TRANSFERS AN INTEREST IN REAL PROPERTY BEFORE IT IS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS: YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER OR YOUR DRIVER’S LICENSE NUMBER.
The above notice is required at the top of deeds as well at least if recording is intended.
COMMUNITY PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS
Texas is a community property state. It is good practice (but not required) to state the marital status of the parties in the deed since not doing so may raise questions later. For instance, a title company involved in a subsequent transaction may want to resolve potential community property issues by asking that a prior owner in the chain execute a marital status affidavit or take other action to assure that all community property interests are properly tied up and accounted for before title insurance is issued.
It is common in Texas deeds for a party’s name to be followed by one of the following phrases:
an unmarried person;
a married person not joined herein by Grantor’s spouse as the property conveyed forms no part of the residence or business homestead;
a married person not joined herein by Grantor’s spouse as the property conveyed is his or her sole and separate property and forms no part of the residence or business homestead; or
a married person, joined herein pro forma by Grantor’s spouse even though the property herein conveyed forms no part of the residence or business homestead.
Sample choices for the grantee would include “an unmarried person” and “as grantee’s sole and separate property.”
Best practices in this area require that neither the marital status of grantor nor grantee be in doubt when real property is conveyed. All one is doing by avoiding mention of spousal or marital status is deferring an issue that will need clean-up at some later time, usually at the direction of a title company as a condition of closing.
COVENANTS AND AGREEMENTS IN A DEED
Implied Covenants in a Texas Deed
At common law, a deed was accompanied by six implied covenants: (1) the covenant of seisin (the grantor is the owner of the property being sold); (2) the covenant against encumbrances (the land is owned free and clear of liens); (3) the covenant that the grantor has the right to convey the property without joinder of others; (4) the covenant of quiet enjoyment, which represents an assurance by the grantor that the grantee’s title will not be disturbed by third-party claims; (5) the covenant of warranty, obliging the grantor to defend title against challenges by others; and (6) the covenant of further assurances, meaning a promise by the grantor that will take such other and further actions in the future as may be necessary to vest title in the grantee.
The Property Code, without excluding the existence of the implied common-law, recites only two statutory covenants—an attenuated version of the covenant of seisin and the covenant against encumbrances:
Sec. 5.023. Implied Covenants [In Deeds]
(a) Unless the conveyance expressly provides otherwise, the use of “grant” or “convey” in a conveyance of an estate of inheritance or fee simple implies only that the grantor and the grantors heirs covenant to the grantee and the grantees heirs or assigns:
(1) that prior to the execution of the conveyance the grantor has not conveyed the estate or any interest in the estate to a person other than the grantee; and
(2) that at the time of the execution of the conveyance the estate is free from encumbrances.
(b) An implied covenant under this section may be the basis for a lawsuit as if it had been expressed in the conveyance.
The common-law covenant of seisin was a representation on the part of the grantor that the grantor was, in fact, the owner of the property. Section 5.023 changes this to mean that the grantor has not previously conveyed the property to someone else, which is not quite the same thing. It is unclear what advantage this more limited covenant may possess, except perhaps to make it slightly easier for a swindler to flim-flam a gullible grantee.
The law of implied covenants has been established in Texas law for quite some time. “[In] the absence of any qualifying expressions, [such implied covenants] are read into every conveyance of land or an interest of land except in quitclaim deeds.” Childress v. Siler, 272 S.W.2d 417, 420 (Tex.Civ.App.—Waco 1954, writ ref’d n.r.e).
The implied covenants in a deed are conceptually and legally separate from warranties of title (i.e., whether a deed offers a general warranty, a special warranty, or no warranties at all). “A warranty clause in a conveyance is not part of the conveyance proper; it neither strengthens, enlarges, nor limits the title conveyed, but is a separate contract on the part of the grantor to pay damages in the event of failure of title. A warranty of title does not warrant the title of grantor but instead warrants the title of the grantee.” Chicago Title Insurance Company v. Cochran Investments, Inc. 602 S.W.3d 895 (Tex. 2020).
A title “examiner generally does not need to address the issue of title warranties, because warranties are not a part of the conveyance and do not enlarge the title.” Standard 4.130, Texas Title Examination Standards.
To summarize: even though deeds may legitimately vary in form in Texas, the use of the traditional phrase “grant, sell, and convey” will always include the two statutory covenants contained in Section 5.023 plus the implied common-law covenants—unless these are excluded by express language in the deed.
A practice note concerning deeds without warranties (discussed below): a careful drafter will take pains to expressly disclaim the two statutory covenants contained in Section 5.023 in order to assure that the conveyance is entirely devoid of warranties.
One occasionally hears about the implied covenant of habitability and the implied covenant of good and workmanlike construction. Both of these covenants exist in Texas, but apply only in the case of newly-built residences. Centex Homes v. Buecher, 95 S.W.3d 266, 273 (Tex. 2002).
Sale of Property Subject to Existing Indebtedness
The parties may agree that the property will be transferred even if money is owed to a lender. Title and debt are different and divisible concepts, both practically and legally. A “subject to” deed refers to acquiring title to property while expressly providing that the buyer assumes no liability for existing debts and liens. It is a common device used by investors in order to buy property, fix it, and then flip it for a profit, all without promising to pay the existing debt or taking any liability for it.
Conveyance of Property “As Is”
A grantor may be willing to sell only on an “as is” basis, without obligation to repair or remediate the property and without post-closing liability for conditions that may be found upon it. The grantee may accept these terms, expressly or by implication. A well-drafted deed should make the parties’ agreement clear—so express acceptance by the grantee is always the better option.
“As is” refers to the condition of the property rather than the condition of the title. In other words, an “as is” deed may also be a warranty deed. The two are not mutually exclusive. Express and implied warranties of title may be and usually are present; however, there are no warranties made in an “as is” deed as to the state or condition of the land or any improvements upon it.
It is presumed that the grantee in a deed accepts the deed according to its stated terms. However, in a case where these terms are later disputed (in a lawsuit, for example), it is a useful drafting technique to require that the grantee sign and acknowledge the deed in order to establish the grantee’s unconditional agreement with an “as is” clause – or, for that matter, any other custom clauses and covenants that may be contained in the deed. More on this below.
Does the presence of an “as is” clause negate any duty on the part of the seller to disclose known defects? The answer is no. Failing to do so is a deceptive trade practice and may constitute fraud.
Note that a grantor may wish to sell and convey property by means of a deed without warranties, which is the effective equivalent of an “as is” clause in the context of title. If this is the objective of the parties, a deed without warranties is almost always a better choice than a quitclaim (which is not truly a deed at all).
Various Deed-Related Agreements between the Parties
Some lawyers take the view that a deed should be a pure and spare conveyance, uncluttered by clauses and agreements that do not bear directly upon the transfer of title made by the grantor. This minimalist approach often necessitates preparation of companion documents designed to contain additional conveyance-related deal-points that have been agreed to between the parties. As a result, several documents are required rather than one. This may have value when the parties’ side agreements are confidential (and not intended to be reflected in the public deed records), but otherwise it may be simpler and more direct to include such agreements in the deed itself. Both grantor and grantee then sign and acknowledge the deed, making it a contract as well as a conveyance.
An example would be the sale of a rental property from one investor to another. In this scenario it would be helpful to the buyer to include certain assignments in the deed—e.g., assigning the escrow account, any transferable warranties, and so forth to the grantee. As a practical matter the value of including these assignments is self-evident. If nothing else, this method has the benefit of clarifying details that are otherwise unresolved by a basic deed format.
Estoppel by Deed
Generally speaking, all parties to a Texas deed are bound by the terms, provisions, and statements contained in the deed. Green v. White, 153 S.W.2d 575 (Tex. 1941). This is true even though the deed is usually executed by one party—the grantor. The parties to a deed (grantor and grantee) are bound by statements and recitals that are contained within it, even though a deed is traditionally signed only by the grantor. Trial v. Dragon, No. 18.0203 (Tex. 2019).
The deed is a critical document because it more often than not entirely replaces contracts and agreements that have gone before it (pursuant to the doctrine of merger), making the deed the final word on the subject of transfer of title. Given this fact, spelling out any additional agreements between the parties within the four corners of the deed itself can eliminate any doubt or ambiguity as to the content of those agreements.
SAMPLE TYPES OF DEEDS
General Warranty Deed
The term “warranty deed” refers to a deed that contains both express and implied warranties (There is also a deed without warranties, discussed below.) The warranties in a deed may be general or special. A general warranty deed is the preferred form of deed for a buyer because it expressly warrants the entire chain of title all the way back to the sovereign, and it binds the grantor to defend against title defects even if those defects were created prior to the grantor’s period of ownership.
Here is a sample general warranty clause: “Grantor binds Grantor and Grantor’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns to warrant and forever defend all and singular the Property to Grantee and Grantee’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same or any part thereof, except as to the reservations from conveyance and the exceptions to conveyance and warranty.”
General warranty deeds predominate in sales of residential property.
Special Warranty Deed
In a special warranty deed, title is warranted only from the grantor and no further back than that. The grantor’s liability for title defects is therefore limited to his period of ownership up to and including conveyance to the grantee. Example: “Grantor binds Grantor and Grantor’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns to warrant and forever defend all and singular the Property to Grantee and Grantee’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns against every person whomsoever lawfully claiming or to claim the same or any part thereof, when the claim is by, through, or under Grantor, but not otherwise, except as to the reservations from conveyance and the exceptions to conveyance and warranty.”
There is usually no reason not to use a general warranty deed if the property is residential although executors and trustees commonly use special warranty deeds. Commercial properties are typically conveyed by special warranty deed as a matter of custom. Deeds into an investor’s LLC may be either with general or special warranty, depending on the circumstances.
Deed Without Warranties
A deed without warranties is a conveyance of real property without warranties of title, express or implied. Note that we are talking about title in this context (and the warranties that may or may not be associated with it), not property condition.
This is a sample no-warranties conveyance clause: “Grantor, for the consideration and subject to the Reservations from Conveyance and Exceptions to Conveyance and Warranty, grants, sells, and conveys to Grantee the Property, together with all and singular the rights and appurtenances thereto in any way belonging, to have and to hold it to Grantee and Grantee’s heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns forever, without express or implied warranty.” If the drafter wishes to also exclude any implied warranties (certainly in the best interest of the seller) then the following clause may be added: “All covenants and warranties that might arise by common law as well as the statutory implied covenants contained in Section 5.023 of the Texas Property Code are also excluded and disclaimed.”
Why would anyone make or accept a conveyance without warranties? The usual case is when the parties are unsure as to the extent of the grantor’s interest, or if the grantor is willing to enter into the conveyance only on the condition that there is no liability for doing so. A deed without warranties may transfer the entire interest in a certain property, or it may not. The parties assume the risk of this uncertainty, which is presumably reflected in the (lower) price paid. A deed without warranties is therefore considered an inferior form of deed, but it nevertheless is effective in transferring whatever title the grantor possesses. Another way to put it: a deed without warranties may transfer record title but it does not necessarily transfer insurable title or marketable title. Even so, as a means of transfer, it is certainly superior to a quitclaim, discussed next.
Clients often call a lawyer’s office and say they need a quitclaim deed. The lawyer’s response should almost always be “No, you don’t.” Why? For one reason, a quitclaim is not a true deed at all since it is technically not a conveyance. It merely “quits” any “claim” by Grantor to any right, title, and interest that the grantor may have in a certain property, if any such interest exists. In this context, the term “quit” is akin to a “release” of any such claim to the recipient of the quitclaim. There is no “grant, sell, and convey” language as there is in a deed, so nothing is conveyed. Rogers v. Ricane Enterprises, 884 S.W.2d 763, 769 (Tex. 1994). Secondly, from a practical standpoint, title companies disdain quitclaims and will frequently require that a proper deed be obtained instead. One does no favor to the chain of title by inserting a quitclaim into it. If the seller is unwilling to provide a conveyance with warranties (a general or special warranty deed), then a knowledgeable buyer should insist on a deed without warranties instead of a quitclaim.
A quitclaim contains no covenant of seisen or warranty of title. Jackson v. Wildflower Prod. Co., Inc., 505 S.W.3d 80, 90 (Tex.App.—Amarillo 2016, pet. denied). Because of this, the recipient of a quitclaim is considered to be on notice that something about either seisen or title may be awry. Accordingly, the grantee of a quitclaim deed cannot attain the status of bona fide purchaser for value against unrecorded instruments and equities that may exist when the quitclaim was made. Threadgill v. Bickerstaff, 29 S.W. 757 (Tex. 1895). For all of these reasons, a quitclaim is, for the grantee, the least desirable of all conveyances.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if a quitclaim has been recorded for four or more years, Property Code Section 13.006 allows a subsequent purchaser to attain bona fide purchaser status free of any constructive notice of title defects such as unrecorded conveyances or encumbrances.
Assumption deeds are general or special warranty deeds of the usual type. The difference is that assumption deeds expressly provide, as part of the consideration, that the grantee will assume liability for existing indebtedness and promise to discharge one or more existing liens against the property.
Title is separate from debt. They are related concepts but different. One can take title to property without becoming liable to pay the underlying debt. This is what happens in the case of a “subject to” deed. Debts secured by liens against the property remain in place even if title is transferred.
Under an assumption deed the grantee declares his assumption obligation to the grantor—but, it should be pointed out, not to the lender, since the grantee has not signed the lender’s note. Similarly, the grantor has not been released from the existing note unless the lender has approved the assumption and expressly released the grantor in writing, which is so rare as to be nearly nonexistent. As a practical matter, expect a release only in response to full payment.
An assumption deed may be accompanied by a deed of trust to secure assumption which enables the grantor to step in and make payments if the buyer fails to do so. The seller may then recover these “advancements” from the buyer. This enables the seller to proactively mitigate loss and preserve good credit. If reimbursement for advancements is not made, foreclosure may follow.
Can assumptions occur without the lender’s consent? Yes, and they often do, in spite of the due-on-sale clause contained in paragraph 18 of the widely-used FNMA deed of trust, which gives the lender the option (but not the obligation) to accelerate the note in such cases.
Deed in a Wraparound Transaction
A wraparound transaction is a form of creative seller financing that leaves the original loan and lien on the property in place when the property is sold. The buyer usually makes a down payment and signs a new note to the seller (the “wraparound note”) for the balance of the sales price. This wrap note, secured by a new deed of trust (the “wraparound deed of trust”), becomes a junior (subordinate) lien on the property. The buyer makes monthly payments to the seller on the wrap note and the seller in turn makes payments to the original lender. The original lender’s note is referred to as the “wrapped note” and it remains in place and continues to be secured by the existing “wrapped deed of trust.” The buyer receives a warranty deed (general or special) which transfers title to the property into the buyer’s name. The buyer does not assume the wrapped note.
The deed in a wrap transaction should refer to the parties’ points of agreement as to the new wraparound note and the existing wrapped note. However, lots of ancillary details need to be addressed (casualty insurance, for instance) so a separate wrap-around agreement often accompanies the warranty deed. Unlike the deed, the wraparound agreement is not recorded, so items that are confidential can be addressed there.
Trustee’s Deed or Foreclosure Deed
A trustee’s deed is delivered by a lender’s trustee to the successful bidder at a foreclosure sale. The lender often bids the amount of the debt (plus accrued fees and costs) and acquires the property in this way. If the sale generates proceeds in excess of the debt, the trustee must distribute the excess funds to other lienholders in order of seniority and the remaining balance, if any, to the borrower.
Property Code Section 51.009 states that a buyer at a foreclosure sale “acquires the foreclosed property ‘as is’ without any expressed or implied warranties, except as to warranties of title, and at the purchaser’s own risk; and is not a consumer.” It is also certain that the trustee’s deed itself will contain its own extensive disclaimers. Even with these limitations, a foreclosure deed is probably the cleanest title obtainable, though it does not eliminate taxes owed.
Deed Incident to Divorce
The parties to a divorce should not rely on the final decree to transfer title to real property. A divorce decree is a court order resolving litigation, not a conveyance of affected real estate.
A special warranty deed (often accompanied by a deed of trust to secure assumption if there is debt against the property) should be executed and recorded. The deed may also include an “owelty partition” that creates a lien in favor of the grantor to secure payment of a certain sum from the other spouse. This is used to equalize the overall division of property.
Transfer on Death Deed (TODD)
A transfer on death deed (TODD) is an uncomplicated, non-probate method of transferring title to real estate when the owner dies. The Texas Real Property Transfer on Death Act is found in Estates Code Chapter 114. Section 114.051 states that “An individual may transfer the individual’s interest in real property to one or more beneficiaries effective at the transferor’s death by a transfer on death deed. . . .” A transfer on death deed is effective without consideration and without notice or delivery to or acceptance by the designated beneficiary during the life of the grantor (Sec. 114.056). All in all, a TODD is a good basic estate planning method.
The statutory form that was once available for a TODD has been repealed, so lawyers are left to their own devices in the crafting of these conveyances. Clearly, the instrument must comply with the usual legal formalities of a deed and it must be recorded.
A TODD cannot be revoked by a last will and testament but can be revoked by a recorded revocation. In fact, a TODD is revocable (by statute) even if the instrument states otherwise. Also, if the grantor sells the property by means of a recorded transfer subsequent to executing a TODD, then the TODD is automatically revoked: “If a transferor during the transferor’s lifetime conveys to any person all of the transferor’s interest in real property that is the subject of a transfer on death deed, the transfer on death deed is void as to that interest in real property.” (Prop. Code Sec. 114.102).
Can a living trust be a “person” for purposes of being a beneficiary of a TODD? Yes, since in this context the term person has the meaning assigned by Government Code Section 31.005. In most situations, however, it would make more sense just to convey the property into the living trust contemporaneously, without waiting for the death of the grantor.
TODDs largely replace the former use of “Lady Bird Deeds” which are revocable deeds retaining a life estate. LBDs were designed to avoid recovery against the grantor’s probate estate by Medicaid pursuant to the Texas Medicaid Recovery Program. This issue is clearly addressed by Section 114.106(b) which provides that real property transferred by means of a TODD is not considered to be a part of the grantor’s estate.
For those attempting to do some basic estate planning, it is possible to combine joint ownership (JTWROS) with a TODD, so that (for example) parents now have an inexpensive alternative method to pass real property to a child upon the death of the last parent.
Deed in Lieu of Foreclosure (DIL)
A deed in lieu of foreclosure is a specialized instrument designed to transfer property to a lender in satisfaction of a debt and in exchange for a full and complete release. DILs often contain a clause similar to the following: “This Deed is executed and delivered by Grantor and accepted by Grantee in lieu of Grantee demanding and collecting the Indebtedness and in lieu of the necessity for Grantee to give notice of default, notice of intent to accelerate, notice of acceleration, notice of posting for foreclosure, and conduct of a foreclosure sale of the Property.” The customary DIL occurs when both parties expressly consent to the mutual benefits of this arrangement. Morission v. Christie, 266 S.W.3d 89 Tex.App.—Ft. Worth 2008, no pet.).
It goes without saying that a DIL should contain specific statements and recitals if it is to have the desired effect. A simple warranty deed to the lender will not do the job. Ideally for the borrower, the transaction should convey the property “as is” and include: (1) agreement by the lender not to post the property for foreclosure or conduct a foreclosure sale; (2) agreement that the indebtedness is fully paid, without forgiveness of debt and without deficiency, and the borrower is fully released; (3) the liens (i.e., the vendor’s lien and the deed of trust lien) are canceled; (4) the lender waives any claims and causes of action against borrower going forward; (5) the lender agrees not to take any action that will damage the borrower’s credit; and (7) the lender agrees not to report to the IRS that the borrower has received income as a consequence of the DIL agreement. Finally (again, in the optimal circumstance) a separate release of lien(s) should also be recorded.
A DIL is usually accomplished by means of a special warranty deed, but a deed without warranties may also be used.
Unfortunately, few institutional lenders today accept a DIL as a means of avoiding foreclosure. The reason is that the foreclosure process itself is usually advantageous to the lender since it cleans up title by eliminating junior liens. It also clearly establishes a deficiency amount (the difference between the price at foreclosure and the balance on the note) for which the lender may then sue the borrower.
A lender may record an affidavit rejecting and voiding a DIL within four years if the grantor-debtor did not disclose liens of which the lender hand no personal knowledge. Prop. Code Sec. 51.006.
Deeds Involving Joint Ownership and Survivorship
Co-ownership in Texas is presumed to be as tenants-in-common (Estates Code Sec. 101.002) meaning that the heirs of each owner will inherit that owner’s interest upon death. The decedent’s interest (in most cases) passes vertically downward to the heirs rather than horizontally to the other co-owner. (Note that the word “tenancy” here is a carry-over from the verbiage of English common law. In this context, tenant means owner, not lessee.)
In contrast, joint tenancy with rights of survivorship (JTWROS) provides that a co-owner will inherit the other co-owner’s interest upon death—a horizontal and automatic transfer. This can be a useful technique for married buyers who want to take title as JTWROS as part of a basic estate plan.
JTWROS is established by statute in Texas and requires an express written agreement signed by the parties. Estates Code Section 112.051 et seq. governs in the case of spouses and Section 111.001(a) applies in the case of non-spouses. These statutory requirements supersede the old common-law rule that joint tenancy needed to be established at the inception of title.
As to unmarried persons, the statutes states: “Notwithstanding Section 101.002 [regarding descent of a non-spousal property interest to the heirs], two or more persons who hold an interest in property jointly may agree in writing that the interest of a joint owner who dies survives to the surviving joint or owner or owners.” Est. Code Sec. 111.001(a).
As to married persons, spouses may at “any time agree between themselves that all or a part of their community property, then existing or to be acquired, becomes the property of the surviving spouse on the death of a spouse . . . by means of a written agreement signed by both spouses. . . .” Est. Code Sec. 112.051 and 112.052. This is now “the exclusive means to establish rights of survivorship in community property.” Holmes v. Beatty, 290 S.W.3d 852 (Tex. 2009).
What the law does not say is that a signed written agreement must be a stand-alone instrument separate and apart from the deed itself. It is quite feasible to create a deed that contains specific JTWROS language (tracking the statute) which, when signed by both grantor and grantee, fulfills the statutory requirement of a signed written agreement.
Deeds With Life Estate Reserved
It is possible that an investor may encounter a situation where an older person is willing to sell but wishes to retain the right to reside in the property until his or her death. This may be an excellent investment if the property is likely to appreciate. A deed with life estate reserved to the seller should contain wording similar to the following: “Grantor reserves, for Grantor and Grantor’s assigns, a legal life estate in and to the Property for the remainder of Grantor’s life, including rights to full possession, benefit, use, rents, revenues, and profits of and from the Property, until the death of Grantor (the “Life Estate”) at which time full legal and equitable title to the Property shall automatically vest in Grantee, free of any interest of Grantor, Grantor’s successor, heirs, and/or assigns. Grantor shall have the right to reside in the Property without rent or charge during the Life Estate.”
CURING DEED DEFECTS AND OTHER ISSUES
Correction Instrument Under Property Code Section 5.027
Prior to passage of Property Code Sections 5.027 et seq, instruments of this type were referred to as “correction deeds.” Now, a correction deed is now more properly called a “correction instrument” and takes the form of an affidavit that recites the correction.
Correction instruments are intended to address errors only. If the parties intend to alter fundamental terms of the original conveyance, then a new instrument—not a correction instrument—is required.
It is important to understand that a correction instrument is not a conveyance. “The execution of a correction deed itself, without more, does not constitute a sale or conveyance of real property. In fact, a correction deed conveys nothing; it simply replaces and is a substitute for the original instrument.” Endeavor Energy Resources, LP v. Trudy Jane Anderson Testamentary Trust, 644 S.W.3d 212 (Tex. App.—Eastland 2022, no pet.) citing Prop. Code Sec. 5.030(a)(1)).
A correction instrument is a supplementary filing that relates back in time to an original deed that contained some error or mutual mistake. It corrects the mistake but leaves other terms of the conveyance intact. No new consideration is required. Broadway Nat’l Bank v. Yates Energy Corp., 631 S.W.3d 16 (Tex. 2021).
When is a correction instrument appropriate?
In determining whether or not to utilize a correction, the first step is to make sure one is looking at an instrument of conveyance (e.g., a warranty deed, not an affidavit or the like). The second step is to examine the instrument and determine if the error is non-material or material.
Section 5.028 deals with correction instruments that make a non-material correction to instruments of conveyance—the classic scrivener’s error, in other words. Perhaps a distance or an angle in the legal description was misstated, or the name of a party is misspelled. A person with personal knowledge of the facts may execute this type of correction instrument without joinder of others, but a copy of the correction instrument must be sent to each party to the original instrument.
Material corrections are a more serious issue and are addressed by Section 5.029. Examples include conveyance of the wrong property (lot 5 instead of lot 6 for example) or conveyance to the wrong entity. A correction instrument effecting this sort of material correction must be executed by each party to the original recorded instrument. “If a material correction is required, Section 5.029 requires that either the original parties to the transaction or the heirs, successors, or assigns of an original party, if applicable, must execute it.” See Endeavor, cited above.
Can the parties use a correction instrument to correct a material error after a third party acquires an interest in the property? Must the third party sign off on the change? No, says the Supreme Court in the above-cited Broadway National Bank case; Section 5.029 permits the original parties to a conveyance to execute a valid correction instrument even when the original grantees no longer own the subject property.
Notwithstanding this case law, one can expect that title companies, in order to protect their interests, will continue to insist that all affected parties sign a material correction instrument before they will issue a title policy. See Standard 2.20, Texas Title Examination Standards.
Experienced practitioners will tell you that it is the better practice to have any correction instrument executed by all affected parties if it is feasible to do so.
Statute of Limitations in Deed Correction and Reformation Cases
The usual four-year statute of limitations for written documents commences on the date the deed is signed and delivered, or when a claimant discovers, or through the exercise of ordinary diligence, should have discovered the alleged error or defect (known as the “discovery rule”). There is, however, a rebuttable presumption that the respective parties know the contents of a deed at the time of closing, particularly if clearly stated, since it is the basic due diligence obligation of nearly everyone to read a document before signing or receiving it at a real estate closing. Trahan v. Mettlen, 428 S.W.3d 905 (Tex.App.—Texarkana 2014, no pet.).
In cases of mistake, waiting to take action does not work to the benefit of the plaintiff. In Jarzombek v. Ramsey (534 S.W.3d 534 (Tex.App.—San Antonio [4th Dist.] 2017, pet. denied), the court declined to reform a deed seven years after closing, stating that the discovery rule is not intended to extend the statute of limitations for the purpose of correcting conspicuous and plainly-evident mistakes.
When a court is asked to interpret a deed that is ambiguous in its wording, the “court’s primary goal . . . is to ascertain the true intention of the parties as expressed within the ‘four corners’ of the instrument.” This is known as the “four corners rule” and is frequently applied in the interpretation of legal instruments generally, not just deeds. Courts in this position look at the expressed intent of the parties as reflected by actual wording, not what the parties subjectively believe they were trying to say. “Generally, deeds are construed to confer upon the grantee the greatest estate that the terms of the instrument will allow.” Rahlek, Ltd. v. Wells, 587 S.W.3d 57 (Tex.App.—Eastland 2019, pet. denied).
A good reason for recording a deed is to preserve evidence of the transfer in the event the original document cannot be located. What happens when an unrecorded deed is lost or destroyed? “A deed or other document is not made ineffective by its destruction or loss. . . . Production of the original document is excused when it is established that the document has been lost or destroyed. . . . Other evidence of the contents of a writing is admissible if the original has been lost or destroyed. . . . Loss or destruction of the document is established by proof of search for this document and inability to find it.” Gause v. Gause, 496 S.W.3d 913 (Tex.App.—Austin, 2016, no pet.).
A fraudulent deed is a void deed, but affirmative action must be taken in order to establish that the deed is fraudulent. A finding of fraud does not happen automatically, merely upon allegation or notice to the offending party. Remedies include:
1. Statutory Remedies under the Government Code
(a) County Clerk Action (Government Code Section 51.901)
Section 51.901, entitled “Fraudulent Document or Instrument,” requires a county clerk to act if there is “a reasonable basis to believe in good faith that document or instrument previously filed or recorded or offered or submitted for filing or for recording is fraudulent.” One way to trigger such action is for an aggrieved party to file an affidavit and then raise the matter with the county clerk. A copy of the affidavit should be sent to the perpetrating party along with a demand that the fraudulent instrument be canceled.
(b) District Court Action (Government Code Section 51.903)
Section 51.903, entitled “Action on Fraudulent Lien on Property,” contemplates action by a district court in response to a motion supported by an affidavit (see statute for suggested form). Although this section is primarily known as a remedy against fraudulent liens, it also addresses an instrument that assert a fraudulent interest in real property—which would certainly include a fraudulent deed claiming a fee-simple interest. Considered an expedited remedy, Section 51.903 should not require the filing of underlying lawsuit or scheduling a hearing.
2. Lawsuit Remedy
If statutory remedies are unsuccessful, a suit alleging fraud (both common-law fraud and statutory fraud under Business & Commerce Code Section 27.01) and requesting rescission and a declaratory judgment should be filed in district court. When it comes to penalties, Section 12.002 of the Civil Practice & Remedies Code provides that a person who knowingly and intentionally files a fraudulent lien or claim against real property may be held liable in civil district court for the greater of $10,000 or actual damages, exemplary damages, and recovery of attorney’s fees and costs.
Note that there is no rule at this stage requiring one to choose a specific remedy to the exclusion of the others. It may well be the better option to pursue all available remedies simultaneously.
DEEDS AND THE EARNEST MONEY CONTRACT
Consideration of what the deed will look like should begin at the contract stage. Too often, the content of the deed is assumed. But what if the transaction is “as is?” If so, then a prudent seller should want to make sure that the deed at closing includes an express “as is” clause. Why? Because these clauses vary in quality and quantity and can be the subject of much debate. The exact wording of the “as is” clause in the deed will shape and determine the seller’s liability in this area after closing.
Since neither the TREC nor TAR contracts offer a box to check for the purpose of including an “as is” clause in the deed, a special provision is required. Actually, the best approach is to create a separate special provisions addendum that expressly sets forth the “as is” language that will be included word-for-word in the deed—so there is no dispute about the wording later. Do sellers do this? Foolishly, almost never, unless they happen to have a good real estate lawyer.
Parties to a transaction should consult a consult a real estate attorney concerning the content of the deed and do so before the earnest money contract is signed. If a party knows in advance that certain deed wording will be required then the contract must say so. Otherwise, the other party will be under no obligation to agree to the inclusion of custom language. The deed produced by the title company’s attorney will be a minimalist document with no custom provisions and no clauses favorable to either side.
It is far and away the best practice to include a special provisions addendum that expressly recites any clause or provision (verbatim, in its entirety) that will be required by either party to be included in the deed. An “as is” clause benefiting the seller is one example; another might be an assignment of warranties clause for the benefit of the buyer. The precise wording of the deed is then established from the outset as a contract requirement, which avoids arguments about the wording at closing.
A separate special provisions addendum is needed to effectively accomplish this since a thorough “as is” clause usually consists of a dozen lines or more, and this wording will almost certainly be longer than the space available in the special provisions paragraph of the TREC or Texas Realtors contract.
By now it should be clear that the wording of the deed is critical to the rights and remedies of the parties after closing. It is not prudent to assume that such wording can be safely implied or that the terms of the earnest money contract will continue to apply after closing. Some contract terms might, some might not. The doctrine of merger states that the terms of the contract merge into the deed (and thus disappear) in the absence of an express survival clause in the contract. “The merger doctrine provides that when a deed is delivered and accepted as performance of a contract to convey, the contract is merged into the deed. Thus where terms of the deed vary from those contained in the contract, courts must look to the deed alone to determine the rights of the parties.” Chicago Title Insurance Company v. Cochran Investments, Inc. 602 S.W.3d 895 (Tex. 2020).
What the Attorney Needs from the Client
When a client needs a deed prepared, the existing warranty deed to the property should be provided to the attorney along with a copy of the sales contract and title commitment. Since Texas is a community property state, the client should supply the marital status of the parties and the names of spouses, if any. The client should also explain if there will be any exceptions or reservations from the conveyance (a mineral interest, for example).
If the deed conveys property into an LLC, the attorney will want to see the formation documents of the LLC. If the company is a series LLC, then the destination series will need to be determined since the specific series must be stated in the grantee clause. And, as referenced above, the attorney will need to know if the proposed deed should include custom clauses, disclosures, disclaimers, or conditions. It may be advisable to secure the signatures of both grantor and grantee on the deed in order to assure the mutual acceptance and enforceability of any such clauses.
Information in this article is provided for general informational and educational purposes only and is not offered as legal advice upon which anyone may rely. The law changes. No attorney-client relationship is created by the offering of this article. This firm does not represent you unless and until it is expressly retained in writing to do so. Legal counsel relating to your individual needs and circumstances is advisable before taking any action that has legal consequences. Consult your tax advisor as well.
Copyright © 2023 by David J. Willis. All rights reserved. Mr. Willis is board certified in both residential and commercial real estate law by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization. More information is available at his website, www.LoneStarLandLaw.com.