Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 26

Thread: county recording/registering - nature of grant of instrument to county, state, etc.

  1. #1

    county recording/registering - nature of grant of instrument to county, state, etc.

    this topic has been on my mind recently and i still don't have closure.

    when we 'record' and/or 'register' an instrument with the county recorder and/or register/registrar, is there an assumption that we are granting the instrument and the substance thereof to the county and/or state and/or "United States"?"

    it seems to me that all such recordings/registrations are grants in trust, but absent any express intent to the contrary, are we not granting the county/state/'U. S." right at title to said instrument/substance on general deposit? does county/state/"U. S." then assume beneficiary interest therein, whereas the grantor is deemed to accept trusteeship?

    love, peace and life to you all...

  2. #2
    Put a legal notice in a newspaper of general circulation, have the publisher of that notice give one a notarized statement that it was placed in his newspaper, have the county recorder record the same and provide a certified copy of the record does constitute a public record.

    You retain the original & make available for inspection upon written request

  3. #3
    Open web page publishing also constitutes a public record.

  4. #4

    creating a public record not the issue at hand - assignment of interest is

    Quote Originally Posted by EZrhythm View Post
    Open web page publishing also constitutes a public record.
    many thanks ag maniac and EZrhythm for the responses, however i was looking to initiate a discussion of the nature of any recording/registration and not how to go about doing it.

    again, i appreciate the data provided.

    love, peace and life to all...

  5. #5
    Andrew....the only way to win is don't play....that way the presumptions don't have a chance to take hold.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    122
    from Black's Law

    Name:  closure.jpg
Views: 222
Size:  295.7 KB

  7. #7
    many thanks for the contributions to the discussions posted, brothers.

    i don't quite know what to make of the 'cloture'/'closure' reference, nor what precisely the suggestion of 'not playing' refers to.

    is one suggesting not to record or register any instruments with any (de jure, de facto, etcetera) entity?

    love, peace and life to you all...

  8. #8
    the black's law dictionary reference may have been to the 'cloud on title' entry...

    peace...

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by andrew patrick View Post
    this topic has been on my mind recently and i still don't have closure.

    when we 'record' and/or 'register' an instrument with the county recorder and/or register/registrar, is there an assumption that we are granting the instrument and the substance thereof to the county and/or state and/or "United States"?"

    it seems to me that all such recordings/registrations are grants in trust, but absent any express intent to the contrary, are we not granting the county/state/'U. S." right at title to said instrument/substance on general deposit? does county/state/"U. S." then assume beneficiary interest therein, whereas the grantor is deemed to accept trusteeship?

    love, peace and life to you all...
    In my opinion, the county courthouse is a public building and the clerk is available, and obligated, to serve the public. The public is the collection of people who live and operate near the area and you have right of access to that building, and service from the clerk, as anyone else.

    The issue is that the courtrooms in the building are always "booked solid" by members of the BAR who have mostly monopolized the time in that building. The obvious reason why that is welcomed and accommodated so enthusiastically, is that the members of the BAR generate tons of "money" for the county; they give the county plenty of business. That doesn't mean you are not allowed access to the court, it just means you have to find the few available time slots in order to conduct your affairs when necessary.

    Now, as it pertains to recording instruments: I do not believe there is ANY claim of interest in your property simply because you decide to make a public record. The verbiage on your instrument dictates your claim; it is YOUR deed (act) and the original instrument gets sent back to you; it is YOUR property. The county clerk is the holder of the public record and only has a copy of your original which can be used to issue "certified" copies of your original instrument.

    Think about that for a moment as it applies to "CERTIFICATE OF TITLE" for a car or the "CERTIFICATE OF BIRTH". Who holds the original? The holder of the original is the one who claims primary, and/or sole, interest in the property.

    In my opinion, "registration" is a whole other animal; I believe that is tantamount to begging or petitioning the STATE for recognition of something.

  10. #10
    "In my opinion, the county courthouse is a public building and the clerk is available, and obligated, to serve the public."

    I completely agree with this. The duties and obligations are upon the public servant, they are the trustee of the public trust. I have been fighting property taxation for some time now. What I have found, and what I believe is this. When they come against you to forcibly collect the tax, they have no case. The have no claim. Actually in my State, the statute specifically states 'in summary manner, without pleadings'. A claim is a pleading. Without pleadings is without a claim. Without a claim, there is no jurisdiction of the court to act. But, since someone will allow a case without pleadings (and or judgment) to stand against him, it, IMO, is considered an agreed case. IMO, that is the consent. The courts here have even held, 'no case can find lodging within the courts of this State, without pleadings or the statutorily required affidavit for an agreed case' (paraphrased but close)'. Some later case even took the affidavit requirement to be from 'one of the parties'. Here, the treasurer and auditor 'enter into an agreement' to bring the case. Interesting, ain't it?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •