|
4313 A borrower whose money and rights were involved in a subescrow had an interest in it, but because he had no contact with the subescrow holder, did not submit any instructions to it, and was not a party to the instructions defining its duties, he was not a party to the subescrow, and because the subescrow holder had no reason to know or expect that he was looking to it for protection, the subescrow holder did not owe him a duty; the duty to record a reconveyance as required by Civil Code section 2941 applies only to the relationship between trustee and beneficiary under a trust deed.CitationMARKOWITZ v FIDELITY (Subescrow) 142 CA4 508 [See: CivC 2941; Summit v Continental 27 C4 705, T/AT 4/02; Vournas v Fidelity 73 CA4 668, T/AT 8/99]
|
|
