Written by attorneys · grounded in primary & secondary sources — see below
An approach to risk of loss in real estate contracts followed by the minority of jurisdictions, under which the seller continues to bear the risk until delivery of the deed.
Sources & Authorities· 1 primary source
Select any source to read its text and confirm it supports the definition.
Common Law
Hornbooks
Course Outlines
Study Supplements
How it applies
Common Examples
3
Flood Damage Before Closing
Meridian Motors signed a contract to buy a suburban office building from Midwest Airlines with closing scheduled sixty days later. Two weeks after signing, a burst pipe destroyed specialized equipment in the building. Under the minority rule, Midwest Airlines bears the risk of loss and Meridian Motors may rescind or seek a price reduction rather than close at the original price.
Storm Loss Prior to Transfer
Atlas Corp contracted to purchase a warehouse from Summit Properties with closing set for forty-five days. A severe storm caused major roof damage one week later. Under the minority rule, Summit Properties retains the risk of loss and Atlas Corp may rescind the contract or negotiate a reduced price instead of closing.
Jones v. H. F. Ahmanson & Co.460 P.2d 464 (Cal. 1969)
Fire Damage to Commercial Space
Vertex LLC agreed to buy a retail center from Horizon Partners with closing sixty days out. A fire gutted the main building three weeks after signing. Under the minority rule, Horizon Partners bears the risk of loss and Vertex LLC need not close at the original price without adjustment.
Foley v. Interactive Data Corp.47 Cal. 3d 654, 254 Cal. Rptr. 211, 765 P.2d 373
Common questions
Frequently Asked
1
How does the minority rule on risk of loss differ from the majority rule in real estate contracts?+
The minority rule leaves the risk of loss on the seller until deed delivery. The majority rule shifts risk to the buyer at contract formation under equitable conversion, so the buyer must still close even if improvements are destroyed.
…Steward v. Mercy Hospital (1987) 188 Cal. App.3d 1290, 1295 [233 Cal. Rptr. 881], declared that Newfield represented a minority view, and held that under the majority view enforcement of an oral employment contract was not barred by the statute of frauds if, within one year, the employee could terminate the contract or…
Business Associations RelationshipsLiability rules related to business associations · Liability of general partners under the Revised Uniform Partnership Act (1997)NEXTGENIntermediate