Opinion ID: 2204896
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: real estate title

Text: In Corcoran v. Abstract Co., 217 Md. 633, 143 A.2d 808 (1958), the liability of a title searcher was discussed by Judge (later Chief Judge) Henderson for the Court: One who undertakes to examine a title for compensation is bound to exercise a reasonable degree of skill and diligence in the conduct of the transaction. This liability, `although ordinarily enforced by an action of case for negligence in the discharge of his professional duties, in reality rests upon his employment by the client and is contractual in its nature.' Watson v. Calvert Bldg. Ass'n, 91 Md. 25, 33. It is generally recognized that damages are recoverable on the theory of a breach of contract, and the legal situation is not changed by the fact that the contractual act bargained for is negligently performed. Id. at 637. This case was tried by the court. In such situation under Rule 886 the judgment will not be set aside on the evidence unless clearly erroneous. There was ample evidence here from which the trial judge could conclude, as he did conclude, that Real Estate Title did not use the skill and diligence Davis had a right to expect.