Contract to Sell Land—Vendor without Title—Title at Time of-Performance — Refusal of Tender-—Damages for Breach.—A vendor who at the time of his contract to sell land was without title,. but who had a good title at the time of performance, and tendered a deed of the same and demanded performance by the purchasers, who refused to accept such tender or comply with such demand, may maintain an action to recover damages for breach of the contract by the purchasers.

Id.—Settled Bule—Enforceability of Contract—Inchoate Title Not Bequired—Acquisition of Good Title.—It is the settled rule in this state that the vendor need not have at least an inchoate title at the time of the contract; but that one may sell land to which he has no title, and the contract will be valid and enforceable if at the time of performance by him he is able to furnish a good title.

Id.—Improper Judgment for Purchasers—Tender of Title TTnobjected to.—A judgment for the purchasers in the action for damages for breach by them of the contract of sale, on the ground that by reason of the plaintiff having no title or interest in the property which she agreed to convey she was not a vendor under section 3307 of the Civil Code, though she tendered a good title at the time of performance, to which no objection was made, was improper and untenable, and must be reversed.

Id.—Default of Vendor.—In such a case as this it is permissible for one to contract to convey title to land which he does not own; and he is in default under such contract only when the vendee has performed his part of the contract and made demand for a title which the vendor is unable to furnish.

Id.—Tender of Direct Title from Daughter of Vendor and Her Husband—Waiver of Objection.—Where the tender of title to the purchasers was of a deed executed to them directly by the daughter of the vendor, who held the complete record title, which deed was joined in by her husband, although the purchasers might have insisted upon title deraigned through the vendor, yet their failure to object on that ground was a waiver of the irregularity. In such ease there is no reason in law or in equity for the refusal of defendants to accept the title tendered, and for their breach of the contract they are responsible in damages.