Recorded vs Filed

[E_Page]

We know that Maps are Filed and that Deeds and other documents are Recorded.

I need a clear definition to explain the distinction.

I don't believe that it has anything to do with Constructive Notice because subdivision maps constitute Constructive Notice, yet are still Filed with the County Recorder.

[goodgps]

"File" as to a court or recorders office can be defined as placing into a docket (or folder) or Volume or Book
Hence the act of filing a map is merely placing it in the Volume or Book to which it belongs. ie; Subd maps, Parcel maps, Records of Survey etc.

See "Constructive filing" in Blacks Law Dictionary.

"Recording" as to a court or recorders office can be defined as to place in an area, a document or writ in order to prevent any alteration of it.
ie; to stand up in court.

Both of these definitions of action seem to serve quite well as constructive notice.


cheers !

[Ian Wilson]

Either and neither, Greg. In the end, it only matters as to where you go to retrieve the document. The Insturment No. is used by the recorded while the Book and Page are used by the County Surveyor/Road Department/Public Works (depending upon the county in which the doucments are recorded/filed).

In other words, the terms are virtually interchangeable and do not have real separate and distinict definitions.

[PLS7393]

Part of it Ian, I believe, has to do with the old systems. Maps use to be filed in hanging files, yet filed by a volume and page. Documents are recorded in a searchable retrievable system, be it in a Liber, Volume, or a Book.

Maps have always been filed, where documents are recorded. It is just the way it is, but there is a technical difference from my point of view.

[E_Page]

After looking at Black's, and searching the CA Codes at leginfo, I can't find a real distinction. Maps (or any other recordable document) are filed for recording, then they become recorded documents.

Although the PLSA and the SMA speak of filing one's maps with the County, there are several locations in the SMA that refer to "recorded map".

Years ago, I commonly used these words interchangeably in discussion and when writing descriptions. I was told by more than one respected old timer that, no, deeds are recorded but maps are filed. Since the laws that pertain to the maps we prepare speak of filing the map with the recorder, I didn't question the truth of what I was told. Now that I can see that old timer status for myself just a little over the horizon, I figured this was one of those things that I need to be able to explain with appropriate reason if I am redmarking others descriptions.

In light of the law and help from you guys, my previously held belief that there was some sort of significant distinction has just crumbled. It has now been demoted to a wording/style preference for purposes of writing descriptions.

Constructive notice has nothing to do with it as subdivision maps legally impart constructive notice but RSs do not. I'm not quite sure why RSs do not as they are recorded in the same office and sometimes in the same books as PMs and FMs. I did not look in any detail at the codes covering which recorded documents impart constructive notice and which do not.

One more belief (perhaps on shaky ground now) that I have is that CRs are NOT recorded as they never make it to the Recorder's office, they are filed with the County Surveyor. Is there anyone who could explain that it would not be improper terminology to refer to a CR as being recorded with the County Surveyor, and thereby shatter my belief that there is at least a little distinction between the terms.

Thanks for the input.

[Steve Martin]

Evan,

I believe the issue with Records of Surveys not imparting Constructive notice has to do with the fact that they do not make it into the chain of title for the property. There is no entry into the Grantee-Grantor index that a lawyer or general member of the public can find while doing research at the courthouse. A Surveyor would not miss a Record of Survey, but it is lawyers and judges that make case law. Some of the knowledgeable people who frequent this forum might even know the case citation for this decision.
There is some proposed legislation to give Records of Survey Constructive Notice status. If anyone has an update on it, please weigh in.

[goodgps]

E,

We take a document of any kind to the Recorders office. The recorder "records" it by assigning it a number and qualifier ie; Grant deed, Parcel Map, Marriage liscense etc....
Then an assistant "Files" that particular document into the Dockett where it belongs.

Therefore, Every document that is "recorded" gets "filed"

Since a corner record is NOT recorded with the Recorders office, It is simply "filed" in the office of the county recorder.

signed
Arron D World

[Ben Lund]

Is there a way to "force" the RS to show up on title? Would this help if there was a boundary dispute later?

Ben

[E_Page]

The idea of introducing legislation to include RSs as a document that imparts constructive notice was kicked around a little in Leg Comm a couple of years ago.

As I recall, what came out of the discussion was that there are enough reasons to not move forward with that proposal that we left it alone. Not the least of those reasons was expected resistance from the County Recorder's, who would not want the extra record keeping that it might entail. I'm not certain how much extra work there would be, only that it would be significant enough that the Recorder's would likely be opposed.

[D Ryan]

For subdivision maps, see the Map Act, Section 66468. This is the enabling legislation that imparts constructive notice.

Evan, after discussions with my County Recorder, I tend to agree that filing and recording are about synonymous when it comes to documents/maps etc. at the Recorder's office. I think it's more a matter of convention to refer to maps as filed and deeds as recorded. Although I'm not ready to refer to a Record of Survey as being recorded.

Corner Records are "filed" since the County Surveyor isn't a recording repository.

I'm not sure that attempting to legislate a Record of Survey as imparting constructive notice just by saying so has any effect. Seems you need a grantor/grantee relationship to get it in that realm, i.e into the chain.

[Dave Karoly, PLS]

I have a hunch the distinction is because of how documents were handled historically.

Back in the 19th century the Recorder would copy (record) the Deed into the book by hand or typewriter. Then they would mail the original Deed back to the person who requested recording.

If a map was brought in they would keep the original map and file it.

Many Recorders are indexing Record of Survey maps now. They also record a document in the O.R. book. This is not a copy of the map. One day I was curious so I looked one up. It's just a single page which has the names (surveyed for and Surveyor name) and Book and Page of the map. It doesn't have a copy of the map itself. The difference is they aren't making sure the "survey for" is the current owner and it often isn't. So although the map is indexed, it wouldn't necessarily show up in a Title search. I would think if R/S maps were to be made to impart constructive notice, some sort of process would have to be put in place so that the correct names get indexed and maybe the owners would have to sign the map.

[Ian Wilson]

A few years ago, I was in a situation where recording a statement made by a local resident with longtime knowledge of the case would have been very useful. Merely placing the statement on an RS didn’t seem enough. Unfortunately, the Recorder’s Act does not offer a provision for recording such documents. I made a comment that it would be a good thing to allow recorders to accept statements for recording that are made to licensed land surveyors.

Somehow, this got twisted into a suggestion from me that Records of Survey should be allowed to serve as constructive notice. This must never be allowed to happen. The RS is an exhibit of the field conditions at the time of the field survey. It MAY have bearing on title but it is based on an opinion and an opinion only. It does not receive the same vetting that a Parcel Map or Tract Map receives.

Now, can we please allow this notion of Records of Survey ever imparting constructive notice to fade away?

[E_Page]

I don't think that I attributed the idea to you, Ian. I recall the conversation and your bringing up the topic of how to get such statements into the public record. I do not recall who, specifically, brought up the idea of RSs imparting constructive notice, only that it was discussed and dropped.

That's wasn't the intended topic of my opening post anyway, so that subject is gladly allowed to fade away.


The intended topic of the thread was the distinction between "filed" and "recorded". It seems that it is only a matter of semantics, and as Dave Ryan said, of convention.

Thanks all for your input.

[mbstanton]

Here is the simplest definition I heard from an aging title officer:

Deeds are "recorded" because you give the original document to the recorder, who then copies it and then gives or mails the original back to you.

Maps are "filed" because the recorder permanently files the map in thier office and the original mylar is not returned to you.

Mike Stanton, PLS 5702

[Lee Hixson]

Yes, but the upshot of this thread is that the distinction is not a legal one, but rather, as Evan said:

"It seems that it is only a matter of semantics, and as Dave Ryan said, of convention."

[RAM]

Where's Howard,

He has an explaination that argues there is a difference, but my memory is slipping so I can not remember the details, Documents are recorded and maps are filed.

[torgsurv]

California terminology may be different, but from my experience in Utah:
Official Public Records are recorded (i.e. Deeds, Subdivision Maps)
Quasi-Public Records are filed (i.e. Corner Records, Record of Survey Maps)