## Facts

- In February 1960, Ella Forsgren conveyed about 1.4 acres of unimproved land in Ogden, Utah (frontage on Washington Boulevard) to James H. Sollie for about $1,400 by warranty deed.
- The parcel was bordered on the north and south by other land owned by Forsgren.
- The deed stated the land was conveyed “on the condition” that Sollie (1) have the property surveyed at his expense and (2) build a partition fence along the south line (the north line of Forsgren’s adjoining property), and that the survey and fence “must” be completed before any construction or placement of improvements.
- The deed also stated the property was conveyed “to be used as and for a church or residence purposes only.”
- Sollie never obtained the survey, never built the fence, never constructed improvements, paid no taxes, and left Utah in the early 1960s.
- In May 1967, the east 71 feet along the frontage was sold for delinquent taxes and was conveyed to Forsgren; shortly afterward she entered onto the property, mowed weeds annually, did some fencing, and paid some real-estate taxes.
- In 1972, Hal and Marjorie LaFleur, strangers to the title, purchased the remainder of the parcel (excluding the 71-foot strip Forsgren had acquired) at a tax sale and later paid some taxes.
- In 1978, the LaFleurs located Sollie in Georgia and paid $1,500 for a quitclaim deed from Sollie and his wife.
- In 1979–1980, Forsgren excavated and poured concrete footings for a small building on the property; the LaFleurs drove a tractor onto the property and knocked down the foundations.
- Forsgren sued to quiet title. The district court found the deed created conditions subsequent that were not performed, found Forsgren had exercised a right of reentry, and quieted fee simple title in Forsgren. Defendants appealed.

## Issues

1. Did the deed’s “on the condition” language (survey and fence before any improvements) create a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent with a right of reentry in the grantor, rather than mere covenants or a different defeasible estate?
2. If a condition subsequent was created, did Sollie fail to perform within a reasonable time so that the condition was broken?
3. Did Forsgren’s post-breach conduct amount to an effective exercise of the right of reentry, terminating Sollie’s estate before the LaFleurs’ tax purchase and quitclaim deed?
4. What effect, if any, did the 1972 tax sale and the 1978 quitclaim deed from Sollie give the LaFleurs against Forsgren’s claimed title?

## Decision

- The Utah Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s judgment quieting title in Forsgren.
- The deed created a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, with a right of reentry retained by Forsgren upon nonperformance of the survey-and-fence condition.
- Because the deed required the survey and fence to be completed before any improvements, performance was required within a reasonable time; Sollie’s long period of total nonperformance satisfied breach of the condition.
- Forsgren effectively exercised her right of reentry through actions showing open possession and control after breach, including reacquiring part of the land at the 1967 tax sale and then physically entering and maintaining the property.
- Once Forsgren’s right of reentry was exercised and the fee revested in her, Sollie had no remaining estate to convey; the LaFleurs’ later tax title and Sollie quitclaim could not defeat Forsgren’s fee.
- The use restriction (“church or residence purposes only”) was recited in the deed, but the judgment was sustained on the failure of the survey-and-fence condition and Forsgren’s reentry.

## Legal Principles

- Deed language stating a conveyance is made “on the condition that” specified acts be performed supports creation of a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent, with a retained right of reentry in the grantor.
- When a deed ties performance to an event (here, completion before any improvements) but sets no calendar deadline, the law may require performance within a reasonable time.
- A condition subsequent does not end the grantee’s estate automatically; the grantor must elect forfeiture by exercising the right of reentry, which may be shown by open, unequivocal acts of dominion and possession after breach.
- After the grantor validly exercises the right of reentry and title revests, the former holder of the defeasible fee cannot convey an interest to third parties, and later purchasers (including tax-sale purchasers) take no greater interest than what remained in the delinquent owner.

## Conclusion

Forsgren v. Sollie held that a warranty deed conveying land “on the condition” the grantee survey the parcel and build a boundary fence before placing improvements created a fee simple subject to a condition subsequent with a right of reentry in the grantor. Sollie’s complete nonperformance for years amounted to a breach within a reasonable time, and Forsgren’s subsequent possession and ownership acts were sufficient to exercise reentry and revest the fee in her. Because the fee had already returned to Forsgren, the LaFleurs’ later tax-sale purchase and quitclaim deed from Sollie could not defeat her title, and the judgment quieting title in Forsgren was affirmed.


Forsgren v. Sollie, 659 P.2d 1068 (1983)