Nattinger v. Ware

Citations

• 41 Ill. 245

Syllabus

<p>1. Recording act—whether a deed takes effect as notice from the time of filing for record — effect of misdescription in recording. Under the recording act of 1833, a deed took effect as notice to subsequent purchasers and incumbrancers, from the time of filing it for record, and the grantee in the deed is none the less protected because of a recording of the deed with a misdescription of the premises.</p> <p>2. Same—whether that ride was changed try the act of 1837. Nor was the act of 1833 repealed or changed in that regard by the act of July 31,1837, so as to make the deed notice only from the date of its actual record. The object of the latter act was simply to authorize the recording of all instruments in writing relating to real estate, although not acknowledged or proven in conformity with the laws of the State, and to make such instruments as effectual, in the way of notice to subsequent purchasers, as if they had been properly acknowledged.</p> <p>3. Same — construction of the act of 1837. Nor, it seems, is the act of 1837 to be given such a construction as to make the class of instruments therein provided for, effectual in the way of notice only from the time of their actual record. When that law was passed a deed was considered as legally recorded at the moment it was filed for record, and there is no doubt the term “recording ” was used in this q,ct in that sense.</p>