58-2203.
Form of warranty deed.
Any conveyance of lands, worded in substance as follows: A.B. conveys and warrants to C.D. (here describe the premises), for the sum of (here insert the consideration), the said conveyance being dated, duly signed and acknowledged by the grantor, shall be deemed and held a conveyance in fee simple to the grantee, his or her heirs and assigns, with covenants from the grantor, for himself or herself and his or her heirs and personal representatives, that the grantor is lawfully seized of the premises, has good right to convey the same and guarantees the quiet possession thereof, that the same are free from all encumbrances, and the grantor will warrant and defend the same against all lawful claims.
History:
L. 1887, ch. 151, § 1; June 20; R.S. 1923, 67-203.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
14
cases, 1977–2020 · leading case:
In Re Vollen, 426 B.R. 359 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2010).
In Re Vollen, 426 B.R. 359 (Bankr. D. Kan. 2010).
· cites it 2× “See Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 58-2203 , 58-2209, 58-2211 (2005).”
Luthi v. Evans, 576 P.2d 1064 (Kan. 1978).
· cites it 2× “K.S.A. 58-2203 provides in part as follows: “58-2203.”
Miller v. Alexander, 775 P.2d 198 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989).
“From a reading of all of the statutory provisions together, we have concluded that the legislature intended that recorded instruments of conveyance, to impart constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser or mortgagee, should describe the land conveyed with sufficient…”
In re the Est. of Roloff, 143 P.3d 406 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “The essential requirements of the above-mentioned deed forms are very similar to the requirements of the TOD deed form. For example, *690 the warranty and quitclaim deed forms and requirements under K.”
RAMA Operating Co. v. Barker, 286 P.3d 1138 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
“81A-121 [1999]); see K.S.A. 58-2203. A breach does not occur without a disturbance of possession and eviction under an adverse title which existed at the time of the conveyance.”
Hildebrandt v. Hildebrandt, 683 P.2d 1288 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984).
“A description of the property conveyed should be considered sufficient if it identifies the property or affords the means of identification within the instrument itself or by specific reference to other instruments recorded in the office of the register of deeds.”
Luthi v. Evans, 562 P.2d 127 (Kan. Ct. App. 1977).
· cites it 2× “However, Burris directs attention to the provisions of K.S.A. 58-2203, form of warranty deed, and notes that the general language of the assignment omits the names of the lessor and lessee in the lease from which the working interest is carved, omits the date of the lease, all…”
Jeremiah 29:11, Inc. v. Seifert, 136 P.3d 957 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 3× “(here describe the premises), for the sum of (here insert the consideration), tire said conveyance being dated, duly signed and acknowledged by the grantor, shall be deemed and held a conveyance in fee simple to the grantee, his or her heirs and assigns, with covenants from the…”
Johannes v. Idol, 181 P.3d 574 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
“See K.S.A. 58-2203; K.S.A. 58-2204. The numerous statements of controlling legal authority utilized by the district court correctly set forth the unrefuted legal principles which govern where the issue to be determined is whether a deed was validly delivered.”
Jeremiah 29: 11, Inc. v. Seifert, 161 P.3d 750 (Kan. 2007).
“The panel observed that the deed met all the requirements for a valid warranty deed set forth in K.S.A. 58-2203, which requires only intent by the grantor and not signatures of the grantees; that the Dallingas had paid valuable consideration for the transfer; that *471 there was…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.