benchmarks.wiki

benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace

MMLU-Pro / 982 / In 1993, a farmer had good record title to a farm in fee simple absolute. In…

Problem

Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.

question

In 1993, a farmer had good record title to a farm in fee simple absolute. In 1994, the farmer delivered to his son, for a sum of 1,000,adeedsignedbythefarmer,namingthesonandhisheirsasgrantee,andappearingvalidonitsface.Thesonneglectedtorecordthedeed.In1998,aninvestor,awareoftheexistenceofthefarmer−to−sondeed,soughtoutthefarmerandaskedtobuyfor1,000, a deed signed by the farmer, naming the son and his heirs as grantee, and appearing valid on its face. The son neglected to record the deed. In 1998, an investor, aware of the existence of the farmer-to-son deed, sought out the farmer and asked to buy for 10,000 a deed of the farm from the farmer to the investor and his heirs. The farmer executed such a deed, and the investor promptly recorded it. The investor's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the farm by adverse possession. In 1998, the investor constructed a fence around the farm. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the farm to a rancher and, for 15,000,paidbytherancher,signedanddeliveredadeedofthefarminfavoroftherancherandhisheirs.Afterreceivingthedeed,theranchermadenoefforttosearchthetitle,toexaminetheproperty,ortorecordthedeed.In2003,ateacherpaidtheinvestor15,000, paid by the rancher, signed and delivered a deed of the farm in favor of the rancher and his heirs. After receiving the deed, the rancher made no effort to search the title, to examine the property, or to record the deed. In 2003, a teacher paid the investor 20,000, and the investor delivered to the teacher a deed of the farm in favor of the teacher and his heirs. The teacher had examined the property, had searched the title, and was aware of the prior farmer-to-son instrument. Although the teacher did not reside on the property,he regularly visited the farm twice a week. The teacher recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a professor, the rancher signed and delivered a deed of the farm naming the professor and his heirs as grantees. Before the professor had paid the rancher and taken his deed, the professor visited the farm and observed the fence. However, the teacher was not present when the professor visited the property, and nothing suggested who €”f anyone €”was using it. In any case, the professor did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The professor then recorded the deed. Note: This jurisdiction uses Grantor €”Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexThe jurisdiction's recording act provides: "Every conveyance of real estate which is not recorded is void against a subsequent purchaser in good faith for valuable consideration, whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded. "In 2008, in an action to quiet title to the farm, which of the following parties would have priority of title?
Plain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
In 1993, a farmer had good record title to a farm in fee simple absolute. In 1994, the farmer delivered to his son, for a sum of 1,000,adeedsignedbythefarmer,namingthesonandhisheirsasgrantee,andappearingvalidonitsface.Thesonneglectedtorecordthedeed.In1998,aninvestor,awareoftheexistenceofthefarmer−to−sondeed,soughtoutthefarmerandaskedtobuyfor10,000 a deed of the farm from the farmer to the investor and his heirs. The farmer executed such a deed, and the investor promptly recorded it. The investor's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the farm by adverse possession. In 1998, the investor constructed a fence around the farm. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the farm to a rancher and, for 15,000,paidbytherancher,signedanddeliveredadeedofthefarminfavoroftherancherandhisheirs.Afterreceivingthedeed,theranchermadenoefforttosearchthetitle,toexaminetheproperty,ortorecordthedeed.In2003,ateacherpaidtheinvestor20,000, and the investor delivered to the teacher a deed of the farm in favor of the teacher and his heirs. The teacher had examined the property, had searched the title, and was aware of the prior farmer-to-son instrument. Although the teacher did not reside on the property,he regularly visited the farm twice a week. The teacher recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a professor, the rancher signed and delivered a deed of the farm naming the professor and his heirs as grantees. Before the professor had paid the rancher and taken his deed, the professor visited the farm and observed the fence. However, the teacher was not present when the professor visited the property, and nothing suggested who €”f anyone €”was using it. In any case, the professor did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The professor then recorded the deed. Note: This jurisdiction uses Grantor €”Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexThe jurisdiction's recording act provides: "Every conveyance of real estate which is not recorded is void against a subsequent purchaser in good faith for valuable consideration, whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded. "In 2008, in an action to quiet title to the farm, which of the following parties would have priority of title?
Original LaTeX notation
In 1993, a farmer had good record title to a farm in fee simple absolute. In 1994, the farmer delivered to his son, for a sum of $1,000, a deed signed by the farmer, naming the son and his heirs as grantee, and appearing valid on its face. The son neglected to record the deed. In 1998, an investor, aware of the existence of the farmer-to-son deed, sought out the farmer and asked to buy for $10,000 a deed of the farm from the farmer to the investor and his heirs. The farmer executed such a deed, and the investor promptly recorded it. The investor's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the farm by adverse possession. In 1998, the investor constructed a fence around the farm. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the farm to a rancher and, for $15,000, paid by the rancher, signed and delivered a deed of the farm in favor of the rancher and his heirs. After receiving the deed, the rancher made no effort to search the title, to examine the property, or to record the deed. In 2003, a teacher paid the investor $20,000, and the investor delivered to the teacher a deed of the farm in favor of the teacher and his heirs. The teacher had examined the property, had searched the title, and was aware of the prior farmer-to-son instrument. Although the teacher did not reside on the property,he regularly visited the farm twice a week. The teacher recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a professor, the rancher signed and delivered a deed of the farm naming the professor and his heirs as grantees. Before the professor had paid the rancher and taken his deed, the professor visited the farm and observed the fence. However, the teacher was not present when the professor visited the property, and nothing suggested who €”f anyone €”was using it. In any case, the professor did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The professor then recorded the deed. Note: This jurisdiction uses Grantor €”Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexThe jurisdiction's recording act provides: "Every conveyance of real estate which is not recorded is void against a subsequent purchaser in good faith for valuable consideration, whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded. "In 2008, in an action to quiet title to the farm, which of the following parties would have priority of title?

category

law

options

  1. The investor.
  2. The professor, only if he had searched the title prior to his purchase.
  3. The teacher.
  4. The rancher.
  5. The rancher, if he could prove he paid the highest price.
  6. The farmer, if he could prove the initial sale to his son was invalid.
  7. The professor.
  8. The farmer's son.
  9. The teacher, if he could prove he visited the farm regularly.
  10. The investor, if he could prove he was the first to record the deed.

src

ori_mmlu-professional_law

Discussion

Discussion

No discussion posts on this page yet. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

See answer Answer published by the source

Artifacts

Code, notes and reproducible work shared by participants. Files are served from a separate origin.

No artifacts on this page yet. Share reproducible code or notes in a contribution. State an approach you tried, the evidence it uses, and a specific question another participant could help resolve. Use the posting template.

Source and history

upstream_id / Original problem ID
982
task_id
9cc25e89-5ef1-5389-a472-ef2aefe140a4
task_key
default--test--982
task_revision_id
1
config / split
default / test

Official source

initial import