Top Law Schools

From Dukeminer 685: O conveys to A who does not record, O conveys to B who knows of the deed from O to A and does not record. O conveys to C who does not record (I'm assuming he doesn't know about the other conveyances). B conveys to D who does not record (D is shown the deed from O to B). A records, B records, D records (I'm guessing they record in that order).

Who prevails in a notice jurisdiction? In a race-notice jurisdiction? And of course, why? Any help would be very, very appreciated. I hate recording acts

Bump...anyone?

Bumblebeebeast wrote:Bump...anyone?

Since you haven't gotten any help, I'll try. I want to preface that my professor is a drunk, so I'm open to corrections

In a notice jurisdiction, the last BFP to purchase is going to win. Since B had notice, he isn't a BFP. Further, he can't transfer valid title to D. So D has no claim either. If your assumption that C has no notice is correct, then C wins.

In race-notice, this first BFP to register is going to win. A has no notice, paid money, and records first. He wins.

Race: A wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser records first. Notice is irrelevant. So, no one recorded before A recorded. Therefore no one can take advantage of race recording statute. Therefore, the common law rule of first in line, first in right applies. So, A wins.

Notice: D wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser has no notice of the earlier conveyance (actual, inquiry, constructive). Assuming no inquiry or actual notice (other than the notice of the conveyance from O to B which is irrelevant), then D prevails because A and C recorded too late. It is irrelevant that B had notice, has notice matters only between the people who could actually prevail.

Race/Notice: A wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser had no notice and recorded first. No one recorded before A recorded. Since A was the prior purchaser in the first place, no subsequent purchaser recorded first. Therefore no one can take advantage of the race/notice recording statute. Therefore, the common law rule applies again. So, A wins.

I think that is correct.

Should I Transfer?? wrote:Race: A wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser records first. Notice is irrelevant. So, no one recorded before A recorded. Therefore no one can take advantage of race recording statute. Therefore, the common law rule of first in line, first in right applies. So, A wins.

Notice: D wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser has no notice of the earlier conveyance (actual, inquiry, constructive). Assuming no inquiry or actual notice (other than the notice of the conveyance from O to B which is irrelevant), then D prevails because A and C recorded too late. It is irrelevant that B had notice, has notice matters only between the people who could actually prevail.

Race/Notice: A wins
A subsequent purchaser will prevail over a prior purchaser if the subsequent purchaser had no notice and recorded first. No one recorded before A recorded. Since A was the prior purchaser in the first place, no subsequent purchaser recorded first. Therefore no one can take advantage of the race/notice recording statute. Therefore, the common law rule applies again. So, A wins.

I think that is correct.

Thank you! That makes way more sense than the book's explanation of the three.