Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Deed Transfer

20 questions · exam conditions

0:00

Deed TransferQuestion 1 of 20

You are representing a client who was induced to sell his vacation home for a fraction of its value. The buyer, a sophisticated real estate investor, falsely told your client that the foundation was cracked and that the area was slated for industrial rezoning, both of which would drastically reduce the property's value. Relying on these statements, your client executed and delivered a quitclaim deed to the buyer. The buyer immediately recorded the deed and, a month later, sold the property for its full market value to a third party. The third party had no knowledge of the buyer's misrepresentations and paid fair market value.

What is the likely outcome of your client's attempt to recover the vacation home from the third party? Select one.

Your client will recover the home because the deed was obtained by fraud and is therefore void.

Your client will recover the home because the buyer could not pass better title than he had, which was no valid title.

Your client will not recover the home because the third party is a bona fide purchaser who took title free of your client's equity of rescission.

Your client will not recover the home but can sue the third party for the difference between the price paid and the home's fair market value.

← Back to quizzes

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz

Bar Exam (Uniform) Quiz: Deed Transfer

Practice Deed Transfer in Bar Exam (Uniform) with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Deed Transfer, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Bar Exam (Uniform).

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

What is the likely outcome of your client's attempt to recover the vacation home from the third party? Select one.

Your client will recover the home because the deed was obtained by fraud and is therefore void.
Your client will recover the home because the buyer could not pass better title than he had, which was no valid title.
Your client will not recover the home because the third party is a bona fide purchaser who took title free of your client's equity of rescission. (correct answer)
Your client will not recover the home but can sue the third party for the difference between the price paid and the home's fair market value.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The deed in this scenario is voidable, not void. The fraud committed was fraud in the inducement (a misrepresentation about the underlying transaction), not fraud in the factum (a misrepresentation about the nature of the document being signed). A voidable deed is valid and conveys title until it is set aside by a court. If the grantee of a voidable deed conveys the property to a bona fide purchaser (BFP) for value without notice of the fraud, the BFP takes good title that cannot be defeated by the original grantor. The third party here is a BFP. A and B are incorrect because they incorrectly characterize the deed as void. A fraudulent inducement makes a deed voidable. D is incorrect because the client's remedy is against the fraudulent buyer, not the innocent BFP.

Question 2

A grantor, who believed she owned a parcel of land but actually did not, conveyed the parcel to a grantee by a quitclaim deed for $10,000. The grantee accepted the deed and recorded it. Two years later, the grantor inherited the same parcel of land from a relative, receiving a perfect title. The grantee then learned of this development and claimed ownership of the parcel.

Who has superior title to the parcel? Select one.

The grantee, under the doctrine of after-acquired title.
The grantee, because the grantor is estopped from denying the validity of the earlier conveyance.
The grantor, because a quitclaim deed only transfers whatever interest the grantor has at the time of conveyance, which was nothing. (correct answer)
The grantor, because the original conveyance lacked consideration since the grantor had no title to sell.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. A quitclaim deed contains no covenants of title. It transfers only the interest, if any, that the grantor possesses at the time of the conveyance. The doctrine of after-acquired title (or estoppel by deed) does not apply to a quitclaim deed. This doctrine applies primarily to warranty deeds, where the grantor's covenants of title estop the grantor from later claiming that they did not have title at the time of the conveyance. Because the grantor here used a quitclaim deed and had no interest at the time of the conveyance, the grantee received nothing. The subsequently acquired title remains with the grantor. A and B are incorrect because estoppel by deed does not apply to a quitclaim deed. D is incorrect because consideration was paid, and even if it weren't, lack of consideration does not invalidate a deed between the parties.

Question 3

You are representing a client, Ms. Smyth, who recently purchased a property from Mr. Jonhson. The deed, which your client has shown you, identifies the grantee as "Ms. Smith." Your client's legal name is Smyth, and she is concerned this discrepancy could affect her title. The deed has already been delivered and accepted, but not yet recorded.

What is the best advice to give your client regarding the error in the deed? Select one.

Advise her that she can correct the deed herself by carefully changing 'Smith' to 'Smyth' before recording it.
Advise her that the deed is void due to the incorrect grantee name and she must obtain a new deed from the grantor.
Advise her that the minor error is insignificant and she should record the deed as is, as parol evidence would clarify her identity if ever challenged.
Advise her to have the grantor, Mr. Jonhson, execute a new corrective deed with the proper spelling of her name. (correct answer)

Explanation: The correct answer is D. While minor misspellings do not necessarily invalidate a deed if the grantee is otherwise ascertainable, the best practice to ensure clear and marketable title is to correct the error formally. The proper method for this is to have the grantor execute a new deed, often called a corrective or correction deed, that rectifies the error in the original instrument. A is incorrect because any material alteration of a deed by the grantee after delivery is improper and can render the deed void. B is incorrect because a minor misspelling does not typically render a deed void if the intended grantee's identity is clear. C, while potentially true that parol evidence could resolve the issue, is poor advice because it leaves a cloud on the title that could cause problems for future sales or financing. Obtaining a corrective deed is the most professional and effective solution.

Question 4

A grantor, intending to make a gift of land to a longtime friend, properly executed a deed. The grantor mailed the deed to the friend's last known address. Unbeknownst to the grantor, the friend had died in a car accident the day before the deed was mailed. The friend's sole heir, her daughter, received the deed in the mail and recorded it, claiming ownership of the property.

What is the status of the title to the land? Select one.

Title is vested in the daughter, because she is the legal heir and successor in interest to the deceased grantee.
Title remains with the grantor, because a deed cannot convey property to a deceased person. (correct answer)
Title is vested in the daughter, because delivery to the postal service for the benefit of the grantee's estate is sufficient.
Title remains with the grantor, because there was no acceptance of the deed.

Explanation: This question tests your understanding of the fundamental requirements for a valid deed conveyance, specifically the requirement that the grantee must exist at the time of delivery. For a deed to effectively transfer title, several elements must be present: a competent grantor, proper execution, a living grantee, delivery, and acceptance. The critical issue here is that the friend died before the deed was mailed, meaning there was no living grantee when delivery occurred. A deed simply cannot convey property to someone who is already deceased - this is a fundamental principle of property law. Answer B is correct because the law does not recognize conveyances to dead persons. When the grantor mailed the deed, the intended grantee was already deceased, making the attempted conveyance legally impossible and void. Answer A is wrong because inheritance rights don't cure a fundamentally invalid conveyance. The daughter cannot claim title through her mother when her mother never validly received title in the first place. Answer C incorrectly suggests that delivery to the postal service can somehow benefit a deceased person's estate. Delivery requires a living recipient, and postal delivery cannot retroactively validate a conveyance to someone who has already died. Answer D focuses on acceptance, but this misses the more fundamental problem. Even if acceptance were presumed (as it often is with beneficial transfers), you cannot accept something that was never validly conveyed due to the grantee's death. Remember: Always check that all parties to a property transaction are alive and competent when the conveyance occurs. Death of a grantee before delivery voids the entire transaction.

Question 5

What is the likely outcome of your client's attempt to recover the vacation home from the third party? Select one.

Your client will recover the home because the deed was obtained by fraud and is therefore void.
Your client will recover the home because the buyer could not pass better title than he had, which was no valid title.
Your client will not recover the home because the third party is a bona fide purchaser who took title free of your client's equity of rescission. (correct answer)
Your client will not recover the home but can sue the third party for the difference between the price paid and the home's fair market value.

Question 6

A mother executed and delivered a valid deed conveying her property to her son as the sole grantee. The son, wanting to share the gift with his wife, used a pen to add "and his wife, as joint tenants with right of survivorship" to the grantee line on the deed. He then recorded the altered deed. The son died a few years later. The son's wife and the son's only child from a prior marriage, who is the sole heir under his will, both claim title to the property.

Who has title to the property? Select one.

The son's wife, because the recorded deed created a joint tenancy, and she takes the entire property by right of survivorship.
The son's wife, because the son's alteration of the deed constituted a valid gift of a one-half interest to her.
The son's child, because the material alteration voided the entire deed, causing title to revert to the mother's estate and pass to the son's estate.
The son's child, because the alteration was ineffective to convey an interest to the wife, so the son owned the property in fee simple, which now passes through his will. (correct answer)

Explanation: The correct answer is D. The initial, unaltered deed validly conveyed the property to the son in fee simple absolute. A deed that has been delivered cannot be altered to change the grantee or the nature of the estate conveyed. The son's subsequent alteration of the deed was a legal nullity; it did not convey any interest to his wife nor did it invalidate the original conveyance to him. The rule is that a fraudulent, material alteration of a deed by the grantee after delivery does not divest the grantee of the title he acquired. Therefore, the son owned the property in fee simple at his death, and the property passes to his child through his will. A and B are incorrect because the alteration was legally ineffective to create any interest in the wife. C is incorrect because the alteration does not void the original, valid conveyance to the son.

Question 7

A buyer and seller executed a real estate contract for the purchase of a home. The contract included a provision in which the seller warranted that the roof was new and free of defects. At the closing, the seller delivered a quitclaim deed, and the buyer accepted it and paid the purchase price. The deed contained no covenants or warranties about the condition of the property. Two months after closing, the buyer discovered the roof was ten years old and leaked badly, requiring a complete replacement. The buyer sued the seller for breach of the warranty in the real estate contract.

What is the likely outcome of the buyer's lawsuit? Select one.

The buyer will prevail, because the seller breached an express warranty in the contract.
The seller will prevail, because the contract provisions merged into the quitclaim deed at closing. (correct answer)
The buyer will prevail, because the seller's delivery of a quitclaim deed constituted fraudulent misrepresentation.
The seller will prevail, because the buyer's acceptance of a quitclaim deed waived all claims related to the property's condition.

Explanation: When you encounter a real estate question involving both a purchase contract and a deed, you need to understand the doctrine of merger. This fundamental property law concept determines whether contractual promises survive the closing. The doctrine of merger states that when a deed is delivered and accepted at closing, the purchase contract's executory provisions are extinguished and "merge" into the deed. Any rights the buyer wants to retain must be explicitly preserved in the deed itself. Here, the seller's warranty about the roof condition was in the purchase contract, but the quitclaim deed contained no warranties. Since the buyer accepted the deed, the contract warranty disappeared, leaving the buyer with no claim for breach of warranty. Option A incorrectly assumes the express warranty survives closing. While the seller did breach the warranty, merger doctrine extinguished this claim when the deed was accepted. Option C mischaracterizes the legal issue—delivering a quitclaim deed isn't fraudulent misrepresentation; it's exactly what quitclaim deeds do (convey only the interest the grantor has without warranties). Option D misstates the law by suggesting acceptance constitutes a blanket waiver, when the correct principle is merger, not waiver. The correct answer is B because merger doctrine automatically extinguished the contract provisions when the buyer accepted the quitclaim deed at closing. Study tip: Remember that merger is automatic upon deed acceptance—contracts don't survive closing unless explicitly preserved in the deed. Quitclaim deeds are particularly dangerous for buyers because they contain no warranties about title or condition.

Question 8

Who has title to the property? Select one.

The son's wife, because the recorded deed created a joint tenancy, and she takes the entire property by right of survivorship.
The son's wife, because the son's alteration of the deed constituted a valid gift of a one-half interest to her.
The son's child, because the material alteration voided the entire deed, causing title to revert to the mother's estate and pass to the son's estate.
The son's child, because the alteration was ineffective to convey an interest to the wife, so the son owned the property in fee simple, which now passes through his will. (correct answer)

Question 9

What is the best advice to give your client regarding the error in the deed? Select one.

Advise her that she can correct the deed herself by carefully changing 'Smith' to 'Smyth' before recording it.
Advise her that the deed is void due to the incorrect grantee name and she must obtain a new deed from the grantor.
Advise her that the minor error is insignificant and she should record the deed as is, as parol evidence would clarify her identity if ever challenged.
Advise her to have the grantor, Mr. Jonhson, execute a new corrective deed with the proper spelling of her name. (correct answer)

Question 10

A woman properly executed a deed conveying her property to her brother. She placed the deed in her personal safe-deposit box at a local bank, to which she alone had access. She then called her brother and said, "I've just signed the deed to the beach house over to you. It's in my safe-deposit box for you." The brother thanked her. The woman died a year later, with the deed still in the safe-deposit box. Her will left all her property to her husband.

Who is the rightful owner of the beach house? Select one.

The brother, because the woman's statement to him constituted constructive delivery of the deed.
The brother, because the woman's intent to make a present gift was clear, and manual delivery is not always required.
The husband, because the woman did not part with dominion and control over the deed, so there was no delivery. (correct answer)
The husband, because placing the deed in a safe-deposit box creates a presumption of non-delivery that cannot be rebutted by oral statements.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. The essential element of delivery is the grantor's intent to be immediately bound, which is typically evidenced by surrendering dominion and control over the deed. By placing the deed in a safe-deposit box to which only she had access, the woman retained full control over the instrument. She could have retrieved and destroyed it at any time. Her oral statements to her brother expressed a present donative intent, but her actions of retaining control were inconsistent with that intent. Because she never parted with dominion and control, there was no legal delivery. Title remained with her and passed to her husband through her will. A and B are incorrect because intent alone is insufficient if not coupled with actions that relinquish control. D is an overstatement; the presumption can be rebutted, but the evidence here (sole access to the box) strongly supports the presumption of non-delivery.

Question 11

What is the likely outcome of the buyer's lawsuit? Select one.

The buyer will prevail, because the seller breached an express warranty in the contract.
The seller will prevail, because the contract provisions merged into the quitclaim deed at closing. (correct answer)
The buyer will prevail, because the seller's delivery of a quitclaim deed constituted fraudulent misrepresentation.
The seller will prevail, because the buyer's acceptance of a quitclaim deed waived all claims related to the property's condition.

Question 12

An elderly woman, wishing to give her lakefront cabin to her nephew, properly executed a general warranty deed conveying the property to him. She handed the deed to her nephew, saying, "Hold onto this for me, but it's not yours until I die. I want to be able to change my mind if you stop visiting me." The nephew took the deed and stored it in his safe. Two years later, the woman died, having never revoked the gift. Her will left her entire estate to her daughter.

The nephew, because the woman's oral condition was void and delivery was complete when she physically handed him the deed. (correct answer)
The nephew, because the woman's failure to revoke the gift before her death ratified the conditional delivery.
The daughter, because the woman did not intend to presently part with legal control of the property, so no valid delivery occurred.
The daughter, because a deed that purports to be a future conveyance is an invalid testamentary transfer that does not comply with the Statute of Wills.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. For a deed to be valid, there must be delivery, which requires the grantor's intent to make a present transfer of a property interest. When a grantor physically delivers a deed to the grantee but includes an oral condition, the condition is void and the delivery is absolute. The grantor's statement attempting to make the transfer effective only upon her death was an invalid oral condition. Thus, delivery was complete and irrevocable upon the physical transfer of the deed to the nephew. B is incorrect because ratification is not the correct legal concept; the issue is that the condition was void from the start. C is incorrect because while intent is key, the law disregards the oral condition when a deed is delivered directly to the grantee, making the delivery valid. D is incorrect because the deed itself was a present conveyance; the attempt to make it a future transfer was the invalid oral condition, which the law strikes, leaving a valid present transfer.

Question 13

A landowner properly executed a deed conveying a parcel of land "to the heirs of my living son." At the time of the conveyance, the son was alive and had three children. The landowner delivered the deed to her son for safekeeping on behalf of his children. After the landowner's death, a dispute arose between the son's children and the residuary beneficiary under the landowner's will over ownership of the parcel.

What is the legal effect of the deed? Select one.

The deed is valid and conveys a fee simple absolute to the son's three living children as tenants in common.
The deed is valid and creates a springing executory interest in the son's heirs, which will become possessory upon the son's death.
The deed is void because the grantee is not ascertainable at the time of conveyance.
The deed is void because the son, being alive, cannot have heirs. (correct answer)

Explanation: The correct answer is D. A fundamental requirement for a valid deed is an identifiable grantee. Under the common law, a living person has no heirs, only heirs apparent. The legal identity of a person's heirs is not fixed until that person's death. Therefore, a conveyance "to the heirs of [a living person]" is a conveyance to a nonexistent or unascertainable entity, and the deed is void for lack of a grantee. A is incorrect because the children are heirs apparent, not heirs. C states the correct principle but D is more precise; the reason the grantee is not ascertainable is because the son is alive. B is incorrect because no valid future interest can be created if the deed itself is void for lack of a grantee.

Question 14

A 90-year-old man, who had been legally adjudicated incompetent ten years prior due to dementia, had a period of lucidity. During this time, he appeared to fully understand his actions and executed a deed conveying his home to his caregiver for a price significantly below market value. The man's guardian, who was unaware of the transaction, later discovered the conveyance and brought an action to have the deed set aside. The caregiver argues the deed is valid because the man was lucid at the time of execution.

What is the legal status of the deed? Select one.

Valid, because the man was lucid and had sufficient mental capacity at the exact moment of execution.
Void, because a person under a legal adjudication of incompetence lacks the legal capacity to convey property. (correct answer)
Voidable, at the option of the caregiver, if the price paid was not unconscionably low.
Voidable, at the option of the man's guardian, because the grantor lacked capacity and was susceptible to undue influence.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. There is a distinction between a person who lacks mental capacity but has not been legally adjudicated as such, and a person who is under a legal guardianship after an adjudication of incompetence. A deed from the former is generally voidable. However, once a court has adjudicated a person incompetent and appointed a guardian, that person loses the legal capacity to enter into contracts or convey property. Any attempted conveyance by that person is void, not merely voidable. The fact that the man may have had a lucid interval is legally irrelevant after the court's adjudication. A and D are incorrect because they apply the standard for a person who lacks capacity but has not been adjudicated incompetent. C is incorrect because the option to void would lie with the guardian, not the caregiver, and the deed is void anyway.

Question 15

An owner executed a deed conveying her home to her son, intending it as a gift. The owner placed the executed deed in an envelope addressed to her son and left it on the kitchen table. That afternoon, she told her son, "I've deeded the house to you; the deed is on the table." The son acknowledged this but did not pick up the deed. The next day, the owner had a change of heart, retrieved the deed from the table, and destroyed it. A month later, the owner sold the same house to a bona fide purchaser who recorded their deed. The son now claims ownership.

As between the son and the bona fide purchaser, who has superior title? Select one.

The son, because a valid delivery occurred when his mother declared her intent and made the deed available to him.
The son, because destroying a deed does not operate as a reconveyance of title.
The bona fide purchaser, because delivery was not complete as the son never physically possessed the deed.
The bona fide purchaser, because there was no delivery since the owner did not relinquish all control over the deed. (correct answer)

Explanation: The correct answer is D. Delivery requires that the grantor manifest an intent to be immediately bound. The grantor must part with legal control of the deed. Here, although the owner told her son the house was his, her actions of leaving the deed on her own kitchen table, where she could (and did) retrieve it, indicate that she had not relinquished control. The transfer was not yet complete. Because there was no valid delivery to the son, title never passed to him. Therefore, the owner was still the rightful owner and could validly convey the property to the bona fide purchaser. A is incorrect because intent alone is not enough if control is not surrendered. B is irrelevant because there was no valid transfer to begin with. C is incorrect because physical possession by the grantee is not strictly required if other evidence of intent and surrender of control is present, but here, the surrender of control is the missing element.

Question 16

A property owner's signature was forged on a deed that purported to convey his land to a buyer. The buyer, unaware of the forgery, paid value for the property and recorded the forged deed. A year later, the buyer sold the property to a good-faith purchaser for value who had no knowledge of the forgery. The good-faith purchaser obtained a title insurance policy and recorded her deed. The original property owner discovered the forgery and brought an action to quiet title.

Who is the rightful owner of the land? Select one.

The original property owner, because a forged deed is void and conveys no title. (correct answer)
The original property owner, because the first buyer's act of recording a forged deed constitutes constructive notice to all subsequent purchasers.
The good-faith purchaser, because she paid value and had no notice of the forgery, giving her bona fide purchaser status.
The good-faith purchaser, because she is protected by her title insurance policy against all defects in title.

Explanation: The correct answer is A. A forged deed is void ab initio (from the beginning). It is a nullity and conveys no interest in the property. Because the initial transfer to the first buyer was void, he had no title to convey to the subsequent good-faith purchaser. The bona fide purchaser doctrine does not protect a grantee who takes title through a forged deed, as there is no title to protect. B is incorrect because while recording provides constructive notice, the key issue here is the void nature of the deed, not notice. C is incorrect because BFP status only protects a purchaser against prior voidable titles, not void titles. D is incorrect because a title insurance policy is a contract of indemnity; it provides financial compensation for a covered loss of title but does not create or confer legal title itself.

Question 17

A landowner executed a valid deed conveying a parcel of land to a charity as a gift. The landowner's attorney mailed the deed to the charity's headquarters. Upon receipt, the charity's director discovered that the land was a former industrial site with significant environmental contamination, and the cleanup costs would far exceed the land's value. The director immediately wrote a letter to the landowner's attorney stating, "The charity respectfully declines this gift," and mailed the deed back. The landowner died a week later. The landowner's heir now claims ownership of the parcel.

The charity, because acceptance of a beneficial gift is presumed upon delivery, and the charity's subsequent rejection was ineffective.
The charity, because title passed when the deed was placed in the mail and could not be reconveyed without a new deed from the charity.
The landowner's heir, because the charity's express rejection of the deed prevented title from passing. (correct answer)
The landowner's heir, because a deed conveying contaminated property is void as against public policy.

Explanation: The correct answer is C. A valid conveyance by deed requires acceptance by the grantee. While acceptance is presumed for a beneficial grant, this presumption is rebuttable. Here, the charity explicitly rejected the deed upon learning of the environmental liability, which was a substantial burden. By rejecting the gift and returning the deed, the charity prevented the conveyance from being completed. Therefore, title never passed to the charity and remained with the landowner, passing to the heir upon the landowner's death. A is incorrect because the presumption of acceptance is rebutted by the express rejection. B is incorrect because even if delivery was complete upon mailing, acceptance is still a required element, and the rejection relates back to the moment of delivery, nullifying the transfer. D is incorrect; while there are laws governing contaminated property, the deed itself is not void against public policy.

Question 18

As between the son and the bona fide purchaser, who has superior title? Select one.

The son, because a valid delivery occurred when his mother declared her intent and made the deed available to him.
The son, because destroying a deed does not operate as a reconveyance of title.
The bona fide purchaser, because delivery was not complete as the son never physically possessed the deed.
The bona fide purchaser, because there was no delivery since the owner did not relinquish all control over the deed. (correct answer)

Question 19

What is the status of the title to the land? Select one.

Title is vested in the daughter, because she is the legal heir and successor in interest to the deceased grantee.
Title remains with the grantor, because a deed cannot convey property to a deceased person. (correct answer)
Title is vested in the daughter, because delivery to the postal service for the benefit of the grantee's estate is sufficient.
Title remains with the grantor, because there was no acceptance of the deed.

Question 20

A seller entered into a contract to sell a commercial property to a buyer. The seller executed a deed and delivered it to an escrow agent with written instructions to deliver the deed to the buyer upon the buyer's payment of the full purchase price. Before the closing date and before the buyer paid the purchase price, the seller died unexpectedly. The seller's heir, who inherited all of the seller's property, instructed the escrow agent not to deliver the deed to the buyer. The buyer subsequently tendered the full purchase price to the escrow agent on the closing date.

Is the buyer entitled to receive the deed from the escrow agent? Select one.

Yes, because the delivery to the escrow agent was a present transfer of title to the buyer, subject to a condition subsequent.
Yes, because upon payment, the delivery of the deed to the buyer relates back to the date the seller delivered it to the escrow agent. (correct answer)
No, because the seller's death terminated the escrow agent's authority to act on the seller's behalf.
No, because title to the property passed to the seller's heir upon the seller's death, and the heir revoked the contract.

Explanation: The correct answer is B. When a grantor delivers a deed to a third-party escrow agent under a binding contract of sale, the delivery is irrevocable. The grantor cannot reclaim the deed as long as the grantee fulfills the specified conditions. If the grantor dies before the condition is met, the escrow remains valid. Once the grantee satisfies the condition (here, paying the purchase price), the second delivery from the escrow agent to the grantee is deemed to relate back in time to the first delivery from the grantor to the agent. This relation-back doctrine ensures that the grantor's intervening death does not defeat the conveyance. A is incorrect because title does not pass until the condition is met. C is incorrect because the death of the grantor does not terminate an escrow based on a binding contract. D is incorrect because while the heir inherits the seller's property, it is subject to the buyer's equitable right to specific performance under the contract.