Poffenberger v. Goldstein

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that one party had superior title “would be to ignore the purpose and effect of Pennsylvania’s recording statutes, which are intended to protect bona fide purchasers”
• finding that one party had superior title “would be to ignore the purpose and effect of Pennsylvania’s recording statutes, which are intended to protect bona fide purchasers”
• quieting title because the recording of a deed did not provide adequate notice
• \The recording of a deed serves to provide public notice in whom the title resides.\
• section 544(a)(3) cannot be used to invalidate a recorded property interest under Arkansas law, even though the property transfer was constructively fraudulent under state law
• “The recording of a deed serves to provide public notice in whom the title resides.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).