Also known as: chains of title
Written by attorneys — see sources below.
The sequence of recorded conveyances and other instruments establishing successive ownership of a parcel of real property. A break or gap in the sequence prevents a subsequent purchaser from tracing ownership through the public records and may render title unmarketable or place an interest outside the chain for purposes of constructive notice.
Canyon Construction contracted to sell land to Cecilia Cabrera. A title search revealed that a prior deed in the sequence had never been recorded, creating an untraceable gap. Cecilia refused to close and sued for rescission because the gap prevented assurance of clear ownership.
Cynthia Cortez purchased a parcel from Central Dynamics. An easement benefiting a neighboring lot had been recorded in a deed from the common grantor to a stranger. The easement lay outside the chain through which Cynthia traced title, so she took free of the burden.
Charles Cunningham agreed to buy property from Crystal Dynamics. The seller could not produce a release for a recorded mortgage appearing in an earlier link of the sequence. Charles rescinded because the unreleased lien broke the chain and rendered title unmarketable.
Carmen Choi bought land from Continental Bank. A prior conveyance to a third party had been recorded but could not be located by searching the grantor-grantee indexes under the names in Choi's chain. The instrument lay outside the chain, so Choi took without constructive notice of it.
Caleb Chang received a deed from a seller whose own deed had been forged. The forgery conveyed nothing, so the seller held no interest that could pass to Chang. The break in the sequence left Chang unprotected even after recording.
Chloe Chen purchased a lot in a subdivision whose recorded plat and deeds to other lots restricted use to residences. No restriction appeared in Chen's immediate deed, yet the common plan placed the restriction in the chain for every lot. The court enforced the residential limit against Chen.
Defendant Christina McLean owns the west 35 feet of lot 86 in the Green Lawn subdivision at the northeast corner of Collingwood avenue and Second boulevard in Detroit, where she and her husband John A. McLean reside in a dwelling house fronting Collingwood avenue. In 1891 the subdivision was platted with lots on Collingwood avenue intended exclusively for residence purposes, and all 91 such lots now have residences erected on them. Robert J. and Joseph R. McLaughlin, who owned the Collingwood avenue lots, conveyed several groups of lots in 1892 and 1893 subject to restrictions that only residences costing at least $2,500 could be built and that they must front on the avenue. The McLaughlins conveyed lot 86 to predecessors in defendants' title by a deed dated September 7, 1893, that mentioned no restrictions. In 1910 or 1911 John McLean purchased the lot on contract, completed the partly built dwelling already present, and has since occupied it with his wife. At the time of purchase McLean reviewed an abstract showing the subdivision and its many lots, observed the expensive residences on the street all conforming to a uniform residential character, and was informed by his grantor that the lot carried no restrictions. The McLeans started to erect a gasoline filling station at the rear end of their lot. They and their contractor were enjoined by decree from doing so. The defendants appealed that decree to the Supreme Court of Michigan.
View caseA break occurs when a recorded instrument cannot be located by searching the grantor-grantee indexes under the names appearing in the purchaser's sequence of ownership. Such an instrument lies outside the chain and does not provide constructive notice.
A gap prevents a reasonably prudent purchaser from tracing ownership through the public records and creates reasonable doubt about the state of title. The buyer may therefore refuse to close and seek rescission or damages.
A forged deed is void and conveys no title, so the forger acquires nothing that can pass downstream. Whether a later purchaser who records obtains protection depends on the jurisdiction's recording act and how it treats the void link in the chain.
An instrument is outside the chain when a diligent searcher using the grantor-grantee indexes would not locate it while tracing the sequence of ownership from the root of title forward. Examples include deeds recorded too early or too late and wild deeds.
…barring a use so detrimental to the enjoyment and value of its neighbors. Defendants insist that no restrictions appear in their chain of title and they purchased without notice of any reciprocal negative easement, and deny that a gasoline station is a nuisance per se. We find no occasion to pass upon the question of nuisance, as…