Faris Young

Property Essay #2

Joe v. Will – Quiet Title Action

Joe should prevail against Will under the common law, in a race statute jurisdiction, and
in a race-notice statute jurisdiction and Will should prevail against Joe under a notice statute
jurisdiction.
The common law default rule for the recording acts is first in time, first in right. This
means that whoever O conveyed a property interest to first, wins. Here, Since Mike conveyed
Maltenhops to Joe first, not Will, Joe would be rewarded the title to the property. Under the
common law, Joe would have the right to the title of Maltenhops.
Under modern law, there are three types of recording acts. These are race recording acts,
notice recording acts, and race-notice recording acts. The recording acts protect grantees by
providing that, if an interest in land is recorded, subsequent grantees are on notice of a prior
grant of the land. In addition, the statutes protect the subsequent grantees if the initial grantee
fails to record.
Notice is an important factor in most jurisdictions. There are three types of notice:
actual, constructive notice through record, and constructive notice through inquiry. Actual
notice is when a party is aware of the prior competing conveyance. Constructive notice through
recorded is when a properly recorded property interest gives constructive notice to all who take
an interest in the property subsequent to the recording. Constructive notice through inquiry is
when a party has notice of a competing interest through facts sufficient to prompt a reasonable
person to inquire further into the state of the title.
First, under a race statute, whoever records first wins. A race recording act holds that a
prior unrecorded conveyance is invalid against a subsequent purchaser who records first. Notice
is irrelevant in race statute jurisdictions. It does not matter if the second grantee knew of the first
grantee, all that matters is who records first. Here, Joe recorded two days before Will did.
Under a race statute jurisdiction, Joe would prevail against Will.
Second, under a notice statute, a subsequent bona fide purchaser prevails over a prior
grantee who fails to record. A bona fide purchaser is someone who pays value and has no actual
or constructive notice of a prior grant. Here, Will is a bona fide purchaser because he received
the land for valuable consideration and had no actual or constructive notice when he was granted
the right to the title of Maltenhops that there was a prior grant. Because Will is a bona fide
purchaser, he will prevail over Joe, because Joe failed to record his interest in the land before
Will was granted the land. In a notice statute jurisdiction, it does not matter that Joe recorded
two days before Will because after Will was granted the land, Joe will lose since all that is
required if that Will was granted the land by Mike before Joe recorded. Under a notice statute
jurisdiction, Will would prevail against Joe.
Third, under a race-notice statute jurisdiction, a subsequent bona fide purchaser is
protected only if he takes without notice and records before the prior grantee. A bona fide
purchaser is someone who pays value and has no actual or constructive notice of a prior grant.
Here, Will is a bona fide purchaser because he received the land for valuable consideration and
had no actual or constructive notice when he was granted the right to the title of Maltenhops that
there was a prior grant. Will can only prevail over Joe if he (1) took without notice and (2)
recorded before Joe. Since Joe recorded two days before Will, Will does not satisfy both
requirements. Under a race-notice statute jurisdiction, Joe would prevail against Will.
Therefore, Will will only prevail against Joe in a notice statute jurisdiction. Joe will
prevail against Will under the common law, in a race statute jurisdiction, and in a race-notice
statute jurisdiction.