Case Study: Abe V. Whiteacre

Decent Essays
The Buyer is entitled to possession of Whiteacre because State B enacted the statute that “no conveyance or mortgage of real property shall be good against subsequent purchasers for value and without notice unless the same be recorded according to law.” The first issue is whether Abe has an action of possession against the Buyer. State B requires “actions to recover possession of real property shall be brought within ten years after the cause of action accrues.” It is likely Abe can sue the Buyer for possession because the claim was brought within 10 years. Here the cause of action accrues refers to the time when the original owner lost the possession of the real property. Even though Abe’s possession of the Whiteacre occurred 20 years ago, he did not have a cause of action to recover possession until a year ago when the Buyer purchased the Whiteacre and started possessing in the property. Therefore, Abe can bring a sue against the Buyer to recover possession. The second and main issue here is whether the Buyer is a “subsequent purchaser for value and without notice.” A subsequent purchaser for value and without notice is the most recent purchaser and he had no notice or reason to inquire suspect property was someone…show more content…
If State B enacts “Race” recording statute that one who records the deed first to the courthouse obtain the title. In this case, the Buyer won the “race” for recording the deed before Abe filed the recover to possession. If the recording statute is “Notice” that if second purchaser had no notice of first, the second purchaser gets the land if he filled the state’s requirements. In this case, the Buyer will get the Whiteacre too. Finally, if State B enacts race-notice recording statute that the second grantee must 1) record before the first grantee, and 2) purchase without notice of the first grantee’s claim. In this case, the Buyer will get the Whiteacre as
Get Access