benchmarks.wiki / Public workspace
MMLU / In 1993, a landowner had good record title toa vineyard in fee simple absolute.…
Problem
Answer published by the source. Consult the official source to check your work against its answer.
question
In 1993, a landowner had good record title toa vineyard in fee simple absolute. In 1994, thelandowner delivered to his son, for a sum of 10,000 a deed of the vineyard from the landowner to the farmer and his heirs. The landowner executed such a deed, and the farmer promptly recorded it. The farmer's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the vineyard by adverse possession. In 1998, the farmer constructed a fence around the vineyard. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the vineyard to an investor and, for 20,000, and the farmer delivered to the vintner a deed of the vineyard in favor of the vintner and his heirs. The vintner had examined the property, had searched the title, and had no knowledge of the farmer's awareness of the prior landowner-to-son instrument. Although the vintner did not reside on the property, he regularly visited the vineyard twice a week. The vintner recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a farmer, the investor signed and delivered a deed of the vineyard naming the farmer and his heirs as grantees. Before the farmer had paid the investor and taken his deed, the farmer visited the vineyard and observed the fence. However, the vintner was not present when the farmer visited the property, and nothing suggested who if anyone was using it. In any case, the farmer did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The farmer then recorded the deed. This jurisdiction uses Grantor Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexIn 2008, what is the present state of title to the vineyard if the 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"?
Plain-text mathematical notation (without MathML)
In 1993, a landowner had good record title toa vineyard in fee simple absolute. In 1994, thelandowner delivered to his son, for a sum of 1,000,adeedsignedbythelandowner,namingthesonandhisheirsasgrantee,andappearingvalidonitsface.Thesonneglectedtorecordthedeed.In1998,afarmer,awareoftheexistenceofthelandowner−to−sondeed,soughtoutthelandownerandaskedtobuyfor10,000 a deed of the vineyard from the landowner to the farmer and his heirs. The landowner executed such a deed, and the farmer promptly recorded it. The farmer's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the vineyard by adverse possession. In 1998, the farmer constructed a fence around the vineyard. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the vineyard to an investor and, for 15,000,paidbytheinvestor,signedanddeliveredadeedofthevineyardinfavoroftheinvestorandhisheirs.Afterreceivingthedeed,theinvestormadenoefforttosearchthetitle,toexaminetheproperty,ortorecordthedeed.In2003,avintnerpaidthefarmer20,000, and the farmer delivered to the vintner a deed of the vineyard in favor of the vintner and his heirs. The vintner had examined the property, had searched the title, and had no knowledge of the farmer's awareness of the prior landowner-to-son instrument. Although the vintner did not reside on the property, he regularly visited the vineyard twice a week. The vintner recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a farmer, the investor signed and delivered a deed of the vineyard naming the farmer and his heirs as grantees. Before the farmer had paid the investor and taken his deed, the farmer visited the vineyard and observed the fence. However, the vintner was not present when the farmer visited the property, and nothing suggested who if anyone was using it. In any case, the farmer did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The farmer then recorded the deed. This jurisdiction uses Grantor Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexIn 2008, what is the present state of title to the vineyard if the 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"?
Original LaTeX notation
In 1993, a landowner had good record title toa vineyard in fee simple absolute. In 1994, thelandowner delivered to his son, for a sum of $1,000,a deed signed by the landowner, naming the son andhis heirs as grantee, and appearing valid on its face. The son neglected to record the deed. In 1998, a farmer, aware of the existence of the landowner-to-son deed, sought out the landowner and asked to buy for $10,000 a deed of the vineyard from the landowner to the farmer and his heirs. The landowner executed such a deed, and the farmer promptly recorded it. The farmer's intent was to acquire color of title and obtain ownership of the vineyard by adverse possession. In 1998, the farmer constructed a fence around the vineyard. In 1999, the son presented his deed of the vineyard to an investor and, for $15,000, paid by the investor, signed and delivered a deed of the vineyard in favor of the investor and his heirs. After receiving the deed, the investor made no effort to search the title, to examine the property, or to record the deed. In 2003, a vintner paid the farmer $20,000, and the farmer delivered to the vintner a deed of the vineyard in favor of the vintner and his heirs. The vintner had examined the property, had searched the title, and had no knowledge of the farmer's awareness of the prior landowner-to-son instrument. Although the vintner did not reside on the property, he regularly visited the vineyard twice a week. The vintner recorded his deed. In 2007, for $25,000, paid by a farmer, the investor signed and delivered a deed of the vineyard naming the farmer and his heirs as grantees. Before the farmer had paid the investor and taken his deed, the farmer visited the vineyard and observed the fence. However, the vintner was not present when the farmer visited the property, and nothing suggested who if anyone was using it. In any case, the farmer did not attempt to search the title before making his purchase. The farmer then recorded the deed. This jurisdiction uses Grantor Grantee Indices and has no Tract IndexIn 2008, what is the present state of title to the vineyard if the 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"?
choices
- In a race notice jurisdiction, the farmer, as a subsequent bonafide purchaser, would acquire record title to the vineyard, because he was the last in time to record.
- In a pure race jurisdiction, the farmer would acquire record title to the vineyard, because he purchased the property for value and recorded first in time.
- In a race notice jurisdiction, the vintner, as a subsequent bonafide purchaser without notice of the prior landowner-to-son instrument, would acquire record title to the vineyard, because he recorded his deed first in time.
- In a pure race jurisdiction, the vintner, as a subsequent bonafide purchaser without notice of the prior landowner-to-son instrument, would acquire record title to the vineyard, because he recorded his deed first in time.
subject
professional_law
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
initial import