Santos agreed to sell and Perrine agreed to buy a described lot on which a single-family residence had been built. Under the contract, Santos agreed to convey marketable title subject only to conditions, covenants, and restrictions of record and all applicable zoning laws and ordinances. The lot was subject to a 10-foot sideline setback originally set forth in the developer's duly recorded subdivision plot. The applicable zoning ordinance zones the property for single-family units and requires an 8.5-foot sideline setback. Prior to closing, a survey of the property was made. It revealed that a portion of Santos's house was 8.4 feet from the sideline. Perrine refused to consummate the transaction on the ground that Santos's title is not marketable. In an appropriate action, Santos seeks specific performance. Who will prevail in such an action?
Santos, because any suit against Perrine concerning the setback would be frivolous.  Santos, because the setback violation falls within the doctrine de minimis non curat lex.  Perrine, because any variation, however small, amounts to a breach of contract.  Perrine, because the fact that Perrine may be exposed to litigation is sufficient to make the title unmarketable
Question: Santos agreed to sell and Perrine agreed to buy a described lot on which a single-family residence had been built. Under the contract, Santos agreed to convey marketable title subject only to conditions, covenants, and restrictions of record and all applicable zoning laws and ordinances. The lot was subject to a 10-foot sideline setback originally set forth in the developer's duly recorded subdivision plot. The applicable zoning ordinance zones the property for single-family units and requires an 8.5-foot sideline setback. Prior to closing, a survey of the property was made. It revealed that a portion of Santos's house was 8.4 feet from the sideline. Perrine refused to consummate the transaction on the ground that Santos's title is not marketable. In an appropriate action, Santos seeks specific performance. Who will prevail in such an action?
A. Santos, because any suit against Perrine concerning the setback would be frivolous. 
B. Santos, because the setback violation falls within the doctrine de minimis non curat lex. 
C. Perrine, because any variation, however small, amounts to a breach of contract. 
D. Perrine, because the fact that Perrine may be exposed to litigation is sufficient to make the title unmarketable
Answer: