data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/d5e14/d5e149bdf5a30c98c258b00fff6dd3725cb471c9" alt="Law Self logo"
Contracts
for the Sale of Real Estate
Every autumn, first-year law students are
taught that land is “unique.”[1] Our legal system treats
land distinctly from other types of property and contracts for the sale of land
differently from other types of contracts.
A real estate sale has two phases:
1. The “contract” phase in which the
parties agree upon the terms under which the sale will occur; and
2. The “closing” at which time the land is
transferred to the purchaser.
This presentation will focus on the
first phase and examine the requirements inherent in contracts for the sale of
real estate, discuss the most fundamental responsibilities of the seller in a
real estate transaction and discuss remedies for breach of a land sale
contract.
To be enforceable, a land sale contract
must satisfy the Statute of Frauds, which generally requires that these
contracts be in writing and signed by the parties. Note that this writing is
apart from the instrument under which the actual transfer takes place, which is
known as the “deed.”
The real estate sales contract should incorporate
all terms which the parties wish to agree to, [2] but must, at a minimum:
·
List the names of the parties involved
in the sale;
·
Identify the parcel of land with
reasonable certainty;
·
Provide the conditions of the transfer; and
·
State the price of the sale[3]
Land can be transferred or sold without
a written contract, but the effect of the Statute of Frauds is that an oral
agreement to sell real estate will not be effective to force the parties to go
through with the contemplated sale. There is however, an exception where the
parties have substantially “performed” the transfer. If a buyer provides payment
(even a partial payment) to the seller after an oral contract AND takes control
of the land or makes substantial improvements to the land, then the contract will
be enforceable despite the lack of a written agreement.[4]
For example, assume that Steve agrees to
sell Jason his 3,000-square foot 4-bedroom home for $400,000. Jason provides
Steven with $40,000 in cash as a down payment Steven gives him the keys to the
home. Jason then renovates the home and installs LED lighting and installs an energy
efficient central air conditioning unit. Even though there is no formal writing
to document the sale of the home, a court will likely uphold the sale. The
payment, possession and improvements make it self-evident that there was an
agreement between the parties. Since the Statute of Frauds is there to ensure
that fraudulent contracts are not enforced, this alternative evidence of the
existence of an agreement will satisfy the policy reason behind it.
Duties of the Seller
The parties can agree to substantially
any terms they like in an agreement. However, two fundamental responsibilities
are implied by the very nature of the land sale agreement:
-
The
duty to convey marketable title
-
The
duty to transfer and vacate the property within a reasonable time after the
contract.
Marketable Title
Every land sale contract contains an
implied promise that at closing, the seller will convey marketable title to a
buyer. Marketable title is free from doubt or impairments and thus
allows the buyer freedom to use the land. [5] The conveyance marketable
title allows the buyer to rest assured that she will not be subject to claims
of other people or lienholders after purchasing the property.
Title can be unmarketable for any
number of possible reasons. One such example occurs when there is a defect in
the “chain of title.” For example, if the seller or a previous possessor of the
property who had it before the seller did not have documentation (in the form
of a deed or court judgment) that established his ownership, it is unclear that
the current seller is the true owner of the property. As such, the title is not
marketable. Another example would be where the seller has mortgaged or otherwise
encumbered the property. It is assumed that the seller will satisfy all
outstanding liens at the time of the closing. A third example could occur when
the seller has engaged in illegal construction on the premises or made
improvements that are barred by local zoning ordinances. Failing to remedy
these by obtaining valid certificates of occupancy before closing constitutes a
violation of the duty to convey marketable title.
Today, most purchasers do title
searches and investigations to ensure title is marketable and/or may purchase
title insurance that indemnifies her if some defect in the title is later
revealed. Title insurance companies will conduct thorough due diligences to
ensure that there are no title defects before issuing policies. Therefore,
purchasers who intend to purchase title insurance often leave the title
investigation to the insurance company. While title insurance is not required
by law, most banks will require title insurance as a condition of granting a
purchase money mortgage.
To remedy unmarketable title, a
seller may be provided a reasonable amount of time to cure the defects. If the
seller fails to remedy the issues, the buyer can rescind the contract or obtain
specific performance with abatement. This means that the buyer can still
purchase the land, but will be entitled to a reduction in the purchase price to
account for the unmarketable title.
Time of Performance
While the default rule is that
closing must be made within a reasonable time, most land sale contracts identify
closing dates.
The closing dates, however, are
generally not “hard” deadlines. Failure to close by the closing date is not
always considered a breach. Instead, once the stated closing date passes, a
party may send to its counterpart notice the closing must take place within a
reasonable time, which is often construed as being 30 days. However, even this
may be extended, especially when the extension is due two factors outside the
party’s control.
Parties may insist on “hard” closing
dates by inserting the language “time is of the essence” to the closing date
clauses of the agreements. [6] A party that is not ready,
willing and able to close on the date listed in a “time is of the essence”
cause will be considered to have breached the agreement. [7]
Equitable Conversion
Under the doctrine of equitable
conversion, once a contract is signed, the purchaser becomes the “equitable”
owner of the property even though the seller remains the “legal” owner until
closing.[8]
One manifestation of equitable
conversion applies to allocate the “risk of loss” before closing. If the
property is damaged or destroyed prior to transfer of legal title through the
fault of neither party, the buyer bears the risk of loss. So, if the property
does get damaged through no fault of any party between the contract and
closing, the seller is still required to purchase the property under the
contract terms. The purchaser is, however, entitled to the proceeds of any
homeowners’ insurance payouts covering these losses.[9]
Also due to equitable conversion, if the
buyer dies before the closing date, his heirs are still entitled to close on
the property. Conversely, if the seller dies before closing, the seller’s heirs
are required to close and transfer the property to the buyer.[10]
Remedies
When a seller breaches a land sale
contract, the purchaser is entitled to specific performance, which means that a
court will force the seller to go through the sale.[11] This is because each
parcel of land is considered unique, and monetary damages are therefore not
considered adequate to truly give the purchaser the benefit of his bargain.[12] The buyer can also
recover monetary damages for other breaches such as remaining in the property
longer than is allowed under the agreement or failing to fix defects in title
or failing to live up to other responsibilities under the contract.
In lieu of specific performance, and
agrees purchaser may choose rescission instead. Rescission unwinds the real
estate transaction and restores both the seller and buyer to their pre-deal
positions.[13]
Rescission could also include a restitution of benefits that each party
conferred upon one another.
If the purchaser breaches, the
seller is entitled to monetary damages to compensate for her loss. Because
these are very hard to pinpoint, real estate contracts often stipulate that if
the purchaser breaches, the seller may keep the down payment (also sometimes
referred to as “earnest money”) as compensation for losing the sale. While the
National Association of Realtors indicates that earnest money is typically 1 to
2% of the purchase price, it can be substantially higher (as much as 10%) in
some markets. The amount of earnest money is, of course, negotiable between the
parties.
Due to the uniqueness of real estate, land
sale agreements, the variety of unique rules and procedures. Other
presentations cover other common issues that arise in real estate sales, but as
we’ve discussed, there are many fundamental rules that apply to all real estate
sales contracts.
[1] Nancy Spyke, What's Land Got to Do with
It?: Rhetoric and Indeterminacy in Land's Favored Legal Status, 52 Buffalo L.
Rev. 387, (2004).
[2] Mumpower
v. Castle, 104 S.E. 706 (Va. 1920).
[3] R. Cunningham, et al., The Law of
Property 10.12, at 630, (1984).
[4] Fall v. Hazelrigg, 45 Ind. 576, 1874
Ind. LEXIS 27 (Ind. 1874)
[5] Voorheesville Rod & Gun Club v. E.
W. Tompkins Co., 626 N.E.2d 917, 82 N.Y.2d 564, 606 N.Y.S.2d 132, 1993 N.Y.
LEXIS 4350 (N.Y. Dec. 20, 1993).
[6] Mindy Stern, 2007-2008 Survey of New
York law: Time Of The Essence In Real Estate Contracts of Sale-Lore And Law, 59
Syracuse L. Rev. 1011 (2009).
[7] Miller v. Consolidated Rail Corp., 41
A.D.3d 948, 837 N.Y.S.2d 783, 2007 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6890, 2007 NY Slip Op
4755 (N.Y. App. Div. 3d Dep't June 7, 2007)
[8] Robert Flores, Risk of Loss in Sales: A
Missing Chapter in the History of the U.C.C.: Through Llewellyn to Williston
and A Bit Beyond, 27 Pac. L.J. 161, (1996).
[9] Robert Flores, A Comparison of the
Rules and Rationales for Allocating Risks Arising in Realty Sales Using
Executory Sale Contracts and Escrows, 59 Mo. L. Rev. 307, (1994).
[10] Clapp v. Tower, 11 N.D. 556, 93 N.W.
862, 1903 N.D. LEXIS 69 (N.D. 1903)
[11] E. Allan Farnsworth, Farnsworth on
Contracts 162 (3d ed. 2000).
[12] Tanya Marsh, Sometimes Blackacre Is a
Widget: Rethinking Commercial Real Estate Contract Remedies, 88 Neb. L. Rev.
635, (2010).
[13] Kevin Brodehl, “Respect the remedy of
rescission in real estate disputes,” http://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=7576bb1a-8479-45a2-b452-7b1dd7d2ad30,
(2015).