Conveyance

The transfer of the title of land from one person or class of persons to another.

Dickerman v. Abrahams, 21 Barb. (N. Y.) 551; Abendroth v. Town of Greenwich, 29 Conn. 356.

There is no magical meaning in this word; it denotes an instrument which carries from one person to another an interest in la ml; Cairns, L. C, in L. R. 10 Ch. App. 12. The instrument for effecting such transfer. It includes leases; Jones v. Marks. 47 Cal. 242; and mortgages; Odd Fellows Savings Bank v. Banton, 40 Cal. 003. When there is no express agreement to the contrary, the expense of the conveyance falls upon the purchaser; 2 Ve& 155, note; who must prepare and tender the conveyance.

But see, antra, Fairfax v. Lewis. 2 Rand. (Va.) 20; Warvelle, Vend. 347.

The expense of the execution of the conveyance is, on the contrary, usually borne by the dor; Sugd. Vend. & P. 296; contra, Fairfax v. Lewis. 2 Hand. (Va.) 20; Cooperv.

Brown, 2 Mc Lean lit.". Fed. Cas. e Livermore v. Bagley, 3 Mass. 1^7; Dudley v. Mimner, 5 id. 472; Funom. 2. § 12.

The forms of conveyance have varied widely from each other at different periods in the history of the law, and in the various states of the United States. The m ode at present prevailing in this country is by bargain and sale. A lease is a conveyance; Shlmer v. Town Marks, 47 Cal. 242; Crouse r. Michell, 130 Mich. 347, 90 N. W. 32, 97 Am. St. Rep. 479; Koeber v. Somers, 108 Wis. 497, 84 N. W. 991, 52 L. R. A. 512; Milliken v. Faulk, 111 Ala. 058, 20 South. 594; contra, Stone v. Stone, 1 R. I. 425 (under a general recording statute; and is it where a married woman's act requires a husband to join in all conveyances?); Heal v. Oil Co., 150 Ind. 483, 50 N. E. 482; Perkins v. Morse, 78 Me. 17, 2 Atl. 130, 57 Am. Rep. 7S0; Sullivan v. Barry, 46 N. J. L. 1; nor within meaning of an act declaring that no covenants shall be implied in any conveyance of real estate; Tone v. Brace, 11 Paige Ch. (N. Y.) 566; Mayor, etc., of City of New York v. Mabie, 13 N. Y. 151, 64 Am. Dec. 538; Shaft v. Carey, 107 Wis. 273, 83 N. W. 288. Where a statute allowed appeals in cases involving conveyances of real estate, it was held that an order directing a lease to be executed was not within the statute; Tuohy's Estate, 23 Mont. 305, 58 Pac. 722.