Blake v. Graham
6 Ohio St. (N.S.) 580 (1856)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A recorded deed only provides constructive notice to subsequent purchasers who claim title through the same grantor. A deed recorded outside the chain of title, from a grantor who is a stranger to that chain, does not provide constructive notice to a subsequent purchaser who takes title from the true owner.
Facts:
- In 1800, Dr. Felix Lynn owned the land in question in Ohio.
- Dr. Lynn authorized John Heckawelder to sell the land, and Heckawelder entered into a contract of sale with George Kintner, receiving partial payment before Lynn's death.
- In 1807, Dr. Lynn created a will that authorized his executors to sell certain lands, but it did not specifically mention or refer to his Ohio lands.
- Dr. Lynn died in 1809, and his will was probated in Pennsylvania but never in Ohio.
- On May 1, 1809, Dr. Lynn's executors, in Pennsylvania, executed a deed for the Ohio land to George Kintner, which was duly recorded. This deed recited the prior contract between Heckawelder and Kintner.
- In 1838, the New Philadelphia Lateral Canal Company, suspecting its own title was invalid, acquired a deed for the same land from Dr. Lynn's legal heirs for one dollar.
- The title acquired from the heirs was subsequently conveyed through mesne conveyances to the defendant, Graham.
- The defendants did not have actual notice of the plaintiffs' claim, which originates from the 1809 executors' deed to Kintner.
Procedural Posture:
- The plaintiffs, claiming title through George Kintner, filed an action in the nature of a bill in chancery in a court in Tuscarawas county, Ohio.
- The suit was brought against the defendants, who were in possession of the land and claimed title through the heirs of Dr. Lynn.
- The plaintiffs sought to quiet their title and obtain a partition of the property.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a recorded deed from a testator's executors, who lacked authority to convey the specific land, provide constructive notice of its contents to a subsequent purchaser who derives their title from the testator's heirs?
Opinions:
Majority - Brinkerhoff, J.
No. The recorded deed from Dr. Lynn's executors does not provide constructive notice to subsequent purchasers from the heirs because the executors are outside the defendants' chain of title. The court reasoned that the registry of a deed is constructive notice only to those who claim through or under the same grantor. The defendants trace their title from Dr. Lynn's heirs, making a complete legal title without any reference to the executors. A title searcher tracing the chain of title from the heirs would not encounter the deed from the executors, who are considered 'strangers' to that chain of title. Therefore, the defendants are not charged with notice of the executors' deed or the equitable claims recited within it.
Analysis:
This decision solidifies the 'chain of title' doctrine in property law, which limits the scope of constructive notice. It establishes that a purchaser is only responsible for discovering recorded conveyances that fall within the direct lineage of title they are acquiring. The ruling protects bona fide purchasers from 'wild deeds'—those recorded by a party who is a stranger to the title—thereby promoting certainty and efficiency in real estate transactions by defining the reasonable limits of a title search.
Unlock the full brief for Blake v. Graham