## Facts

- Genevieve McGuigan owned two adjoining lots (19 and 20) in Pacifica; lot 20 was used by a nearby church for parking during services with her permission.
- McGuigan sold lot 19 to Petersen; later, Petersen agreed to sell both lots 19 and 20 to Donald and Jennie Willard.
- Petersen did not yet own lot 20, so he sought to purchase it from McGuigan to complete his sale to the Willards.
- McGuigan agreed to sell lot 20 to Petersen only if the church could continue using it for parking during church hours.
- The deed from McGuigan to Petersen conveyed lot 20 “subject to an easement for automobile parking during church hours” for the benefit of the church, to continue only while the benefited property was used for church purposes.
- That deed was recorded.
- Petersen then conveyed both lots to the Willards; the deed to the Willards did not mention the parking easement and was recorded after the McGuigan-to-Petersen deed.
- After discovering the recorded easement in the chain of title, the Willards sued to quiet title to lot 20 against the church.

## Issues

1. Whether a grantor, in conveying property to one grantee, may validly reserve or create an easement in favor of a third party beneficiary (a “stranger to the deed”).
2. Whether such an easement, once recorded in the chain of title, is enforceable against subsequent purchasers who take by a deed omitting the easement.

## Decision

- The California Supreme Court reversed the judgment quieting title in the Willards.
- The court held that the deed clause effectively created and vested a parking easement in the church, even though the church was not a party to the conveyance.
- The court rejected the common-law rule invalidating deed reservations in favor of third parties.
- The court enforced the easement against the Willards because it was recorded before their purchase and reflected the grantor’s clear intent.

## Legal Principles

- A deed may create or reserve an interest in land for the benefit of a third party; California does not treat such interests as void solely because the beneficiary is not a party to the deed.
- In construing a conveyance, the central aim is to give effect to the grantor’s intent; deeds are interpreted using ordinary contract-construction methods.
- When changing a property rule with potential title effects, courts may consider fairness to parties who relied on the former rule and the policy against unsettling titles; where the intent is clear and notice exists, enforcement is favored.
- A recorded instrument in the chain of title provides notice sufficient to bind subsequent purchasers to the interests it discloses, even if the later deed is silent.

## Conclusion

The court upheld a parking easement created in a deed for the benefit of a third party church, discarding the “stranger to the deed” doctrine and enforcing the clearly expressed intent of the grantor against later purchasers who took with record notice.


Willard v. First Church of Christ, Scientist, Pacifica, 7 Cal. 3d 473, 498 P.2d 987 (Cal. 1972)