Legal Opinion · Dissent

Security Trust & Savings Bank v. Carlsen

California Supreme Court

Decided September 29, 1928No. Docket No. L.A. 8044Published

1Dissent

PRESTON, J., Dissenting.

In substance my view is that the escrow agreement between the buyer and seller had been fully performed by the buyer Carlsen, and that inasmuch as he waived the condition respecting certificate of title to be furnished by the seller (a provision made for his own exclusive benefit) he thereby became entitled to delivery of the deed and other documents constituting the conveyance. If this position is sound, it necessarily follows that the escrow party was in law under the specific duty and obligation to make said delivery to said buyer. This obligation may not be cast…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Barton v. GrayMichigan Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Shreeves v. PearsonCalifornia Supreme Court · 1924
  3. Cannon v. HandleyCalifornia Supreme Court · 1887
  4. McDonald v. HuffCalifornia Supreme Court · 1888
  5. Bradbury v. DavenportCalifornia Supreme Court · 1898

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API