Connection lost
Server error
Greenberg v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: A property buyer sued a title insurer in tort for failing to find title defects. The court held that a title insurance policy is a contract of indemnity, not a service contract, so no separate tort duty to search exists. Recovery is limited to the policy.
Legal Significance: Establishes that a title insurer’s liability is governed by contract law. Absent a separate undertaking, no tort action for negligent title search exists, reinforcing the boundary between tort and contract duties for purely economic loss.
Greenberg v. Stewart Title Guaranty Co. Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
Martin Greenberg purchased four condominiums after obtaining title commitments and subsequent owner’s title insurance policies from Stewart Title Guaranty Company (Stewart) through its agent, Southeastern Wisconsin Title Company (Southeastern). When Greenberg attempted to sell the units, he discovered alleged liens and encumbrances that rendered the titles unmarketable. This led to foreclosure and substantial deficiency judgments against him. Greenberg sued Stewart and Southeastern, asserting claims for, among others, negligence and negligent misrepresentation. He argued that the defendants owed him a common law duty to conduct a reasonably diligent search of public records and disclose any defects, and that this duty existed separate from their contractual obligations under the insurance policy. The trial court dismissed the tort claims, finding the relationship was purely contractual and governed by the indemnity provisions of the policy. The Wisconsin Supreme Court accepted certification to decide whether a title insurer could be held liable in tort for failure to discover a title defect.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: Does the issuance of a title commitment and subsequent title insurance policy create a common law duty in tort for a title insurer to search for and disclose title defects, separate from its contractual obligation to indemnify the insured?
No. The court affirmed the dismissal of the tort claims. A title Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia dese
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
Does the issuance of a title commitment and subsequent title insurance policy create a common law duty in tort for a title insurer to search for and disclose title defects, separate from its contractual obligation to indemnify the insured?
Conclusion
This case solidifies the distinction between contracts for indemnity and contracts for Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor
Legal Rule
A title insurance company or its agent is not liable in negligence Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa q
Legal Analysis
The court rejected Greenberg's argument that a common law duty to search Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A title insurance policy is a contract of indemnity, not a