"If, owing to the unreasonable proximity of condominiums or other occupied dwellings along the boundaries of a course, a player shall, upon making a wayward tee shot, hear a splintering, cracking or shattering sound, or some similarily alarming or worrisome noise, he may at once declare his ball to be "inadvisable to play" and immediately tee up and put into play in its place an "expedient ball" without assessing a stroke or incurring a penalty.

However, during the remainder of his play on that hole, the player must behave as if his earlier misdirected shot never took place, and if he sees the affected homeowner or is confronted by him and betrays any awareness whatsoever that the mishap occurred, either by a verbal expression of apology or regret or a physical gesture indicating frustration, embarrassment, or discomfiture, then the stroke for his original errant drive shall be counted and all applicable penalties shall be assessed."

Cheerfully excerpted from The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard.

However, under no circumstances may this exception be invoked for the purpose of improving upon mediocre but playable shots, or of endeavoring to obtain by repetition a favorable outcome that could not be achieved through skill alone.

The attorneys with Roach, Geiger & Caudill neither endorse nor condone the use of the above in a competitive environment …unless, of course, a distinct advantage can be derived therefrom.

Source:  The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard, copyright 1992, 1997 by Henry Beard and John Boswell Associates;  Villard Books, a division of Random House, Inc., www.randomhouse.com

The attorneys with Roach, Geiger & Caudill neither endorse nor condone the use of the above in a competitive environment …unless, of course, a distinct advantage can be derived therefrom.

Source:  The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard, copyright 1992, 1997 by Henry Beard and John Boswell Associates;  Villard Books, a division of Random House, Inc., www.randomhouse.com

1. He must immediately readdress the ball with the same club, and his next stroke shall be counted regardless of result.
2. He must not exhibit any surprise or dismay or suggest by gesture or facial expression that he ever harbored an expectation or belief that his swing would cause his ball to undertake any forward movement whatsoever.
3. He must make no remark disparaging the course, the prevailing weather conditions, the state of his  equipment, or the level of his own playing skill, other than a statement speaking not of the fortuitous elimination through practice of a faulty swing or a declaration of an intention to strike at the ball with less force or in a more controlled and measured manner when making his actual, true, real, final, intended, and accountable stroke.

The attorneys with Roach, Geiger & Caudill neither endorse nor condone the use of the above in a competitive environment …unless, of course, a distinct advantage can be derived therefrom.

Source:  The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard, copyright 1992, 1997 by Henry Beard and John Boswell Associates;  Villard Books, a division of Random House, Inc., www.randomhouse.com

1. If the encroachment is so slight that a complaint about the transgression voiced by another player would constitute an instance of unsportsmanlike conduct considerably more grave than the infraction itself.
2. If the markers have been placed far to the rear of the official yardage marker indicator so that the stated distance to the green and the hole has thus been lengthened improperly. 
3. If the markers have been placed so close to the blue tee markers that players who have not elected to engage in championship play are nonetheless compelled to do so without even being able to enjoy the approbation that would have accrued to them had they teed up on the back tees voluntarily.
4. If the markers have recently been moved back from a significantly more advanced position and a player is thus being arbitrarily penalized by being denied the opportunity to play the hole from an advantageous tee placement that countless other golfers were permitted to use.
5. If the turf within the area of the designated teeing ground has been so damaged by the taking of divots that in teeing up his ball slightly in front of the markers a player merely rectifies an unfair playing condition, and the tiny real advantage he thereby gains is more than offset by the huge potential disadvantage he would have suffered had he been obliged to tee up on the remaining playable turf well to the rear of the markers.

The attorneys with Roach, Geiger & Caudill neither endorse nor condone the use of the above in a competitive environment …unless, of course, a distinct advantage can be derived therefrom.

Source:  The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard, copyright 1992, 1997 by Henry Beard and John Boswell Associates;  Villard Books, a division of Random House, Inc., www.randomhouse.com

Sales under this procedure are suspect and often open to later challenges.  It is always recommended that such sales are reviewed by the title insurance company before insurance is issued if there are any questions or uncertainties.  The following factors should always be considered when insuring a sale from a bankruptcy trustee free and clear of all liens:

1. All interested parties must receive personal notice and an opportunity to be heard.
2. Hearing must be at least 20 days from the notice.
3. The order authorizing the sale states the section of the Bankruptcy Code which provides authorization for the sale.
4. The order must provide for the payment of all real estate taxes which are owed.
5. Liens in favor of the State must be paid.
6. One can not rely upon any provision waiving the payment of transfer or intangible tax.
7. A certified copy of the order (and usually the motion to sell as well) must be recorded as an attachment to the trustee’s deed.
8. Voluntary releases of all liens should be pursued.
9. Ten day appeal period for the order to sell must pass and one cannot necessarily rely upon a provision in the order shortening or waiving that ten day period.

Deeds In Lieu of Foreclosure

We are also experiencing an increase in the use of the deed in lieu of foreclosure by lenders.  There are a few things to remember when dealing with deeds in lieu of foreclosure:

1. A lender’s interest in the property under the deed merges with the interest in the property under the security deed unless the deed in lieu expressly states that merger will not occur.  If merger has not occurred a release of the security deed is required when the lender re-conveys the property.
2. A deed in lieu of foreclosure does not wipe out any liens, including liens junior to the lender’s security deed, as a foreclosure of the lender’s security deed would.
3. No transfer tax is due on a deed in lieu of foreclosure.
4. The creditor’s rights exclusion in the title policy will generally not be deleted if a deed in lieu of foreclosure has occurred within the last year.

Source:  Security Union Title Insurance Company  www.sutic.com

Comments regarding the above or other items of interest to you are welcome!  Please post your thoughts to our Web Blog, under the heading “Tilting the Scales.”

Since individual circumstances can differ, the information contained herein does not constitute the provision or receipt of legal advice by the attorneys at Roach, Geiger & Caudill and should not be relied or acted upon without consulting a qualified professional

In the case of Deljoo v. SunTrust Mortgage, Inc., Mr. Daniel Deljoo received from S&F Construction Inc. a Deed to Secure Debt on a subdivision lot located in Land Lot 18 of the 16^th District, DeKalb County, Georgia.  The description was a standard “short legal” which referenced the Lot number, subdivision name, and a recorded plat.  Everything was correct except the Land Lot number, which was really Land Lot 28!

S&F sold to Vanguard Builders, Vanguard sold to Doris Milton, Milton got a loan from SunTrust, which took a Deed to Secure Debt for the loan.  When SunTrust found out about Deljoo’s claim, they sought the help of the courts to cancel Deljoo’s deed and quiet the title.  SunTrust argued that Deljoo’s deed did not constitute constructive notice and that the bank did not have actual notice.  (A little background here:  When a deed is properly filed for record and indexed correctly by the clerk’s office, it will constitute constructive notice of the deed to subsequent purchasers.  When a purchaser knows about a deed in his chain of title, whether or not it is properly recorded, it can constitute actual notice.)

Deljoo argued that because the plat was referenced in the deed, and the plat showed the correct land lot, that the deed description was “self – correcting,” and that the bank had constructive notice.  The trial court didn’t buy it, decided for SunTrust and the Court of Appeals agreed.

The Appeals court said that the rule that says “when a legal description incorporates a plat by reference, it has the same effect as if the plat were written out in the deed,” has been limited to situations involving the parties to the deed themselves and should NOT be extended to third party purchasers and lenders who have no constructive or actual notice of the deed. 

Practical consideration:  SunTrust was able to successfully argue that the small error in Deljoo’s Deed to Secure Debt was enough to kick his deed out of the chain of title, thus it could not constitute constructive notice.  This will not always be the case, and it makes me wonder if Deljoo’s attorney cross examined the title examiner.  Did the examiner just ignore the deed when the land lot number was different?  Was it close enough to examine further?  Most good title examiners operate on the theory of “when in doubt, set it out!”   A thorough and sifting cross examination might have proven that the examiner DID find the deed, but didn’t look beyond the index to see if the correct subdivision lot and plat were referenced on the deed itself.

Also, what if the situation was reversed and SunTrust’s deed had the error…would the court look the big bank in the corporate eyeball and say…”YOU LOSE!”

The attorneys with Roach, Geiger & Caudill neither endorse nor condone the use of the above in a competitive environment …unless, of course, a distinct advantage can be derived therefrom.

Source:  The Official Exceptions to the Rules of Golf, Special Titanium Edition, by Henry Beard, copyright 1992, 1997 by Henry Beard and John Boswell Associates;  Villard Books, a division of Random House, Inc., www.randomhouse.com