## Facts

- In 1986, Norman and Mildred Dahl conveyed a 1.667-acre tract to Harry and Linda Chornuk by warranty deed, but the deed was not recorded until 2010.
- In 2005, after Norman Dahl’s death, Mildred Dahl conveyed the same tract (within a larger conveyance) to Craig and Julie Nelson by warranty deed, which was recorded in 2005.
- From 1986 forward, the Chornuks visibly used and maintained the tract, including mowing several times per year, planting trees, installing drip irrigation, adding flower boxes, and performing general upkeep.
- The Nelsons lived nearby, regularly drove past the tract, and were aware the property was being mowed and trees watered, but claimed uncertainty about ownership.
- After recording their deed in 2010, the Chornuks sued to quiet title and sought damages for trespass and conversion based on trees the Nelsons cut down.
- Following a bench trial, the district court quieted title in the Chornuks and awarded conversion damages; it later reduced the damages to $360 on reconsideration.

## Issues

1. Whether the Nelsons were subsequent purchasers in good faith under the recording statute, giving priority to their earlier-recorded 2005 deed over the Chornuks’ earlier-but-later-recorded 1986 deed.
2. Whether the Nelsons had constructive (inquiry) notice of the Chornuks’ prior interest based on the Chornuks’ open and visible use and improvements.
3. Whether the Nelsons’ payment of the judgment waived their right to appeal.

## Decision

- The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the judgment and amended judgment.
- The court held the Nelsons were not good-faith purchasers because the Chornuks’ visible use created inquiry notice, charging the Nelsons with constructive notice of the Chornuks’ interest.
- Because the Nelsons lacked good-faith purchaser status, the recording statute did not void the Chornuks’ unrecorded deed as against the Nelsons, and title was properly quieted in the Chornuks.
- The Nelsons’ payment of the judgment did not waive the right to appeal because payment was made under coercion or duress.
- The court left undisturbed the post-trial reduction of conversion damages to $360.

## Legal Principles

- An unrecorded deed is void as to a subsequent purchaser only if the subsequent purchaser acts in good faith.
- A good-faith purchaser must take without actual or constructive notice of another’s rights.
- Inquiry notice arises when a purchaser knows facts that would cause a prudent person to investigate; the purchaser is charged with constructive notice of what reasonable inquiry would reveal.
- Appellate review of trial-court fact findings on notice applies the clearly erroneous standard.
- Payment of a judgment under coercion or duress does not waive the right to appeal.

## Conclusion

Visible, ongoing use and improvements to land can impose a duty of inquiry on later purchasers; failure to investigate can defeat good-faith purchaser protection under recording laws, allowing an earlier unrecorded conveyance to prevail over a later recorded deed.


Chornuk v. Nelson, 857 N.W.2d 587 (N.D. 2014)