## Facts

- Harry G. McCain conveyed the disputed property to E. M. Anglin on February 20, 1941.
- Anglin’s deed was copied into the Anchorage recording district deed books, but the recorder failed to index it as required by statute.
- On August 18, 1947, McCain conveyed the same property to Lingo, who lacked actual knowledge of Anglin’s deed.
- On April 16, 1948, Lingo conveyed the property by warranty deed to Mortensen and others.
- Anglin later asserted a prior claim and threatened eviction of Mortensen.
- Mortensen sued Lingo for damages for breach of covenants of title, contending Anglin’s earlier recorded deed defeated Lingo’s title.
- The case was tried on undisputed facts, turning on whether the unindexed record provided constructive notice under Alaska’s recording statutes.

## Issues

1. Whether a deed copied into official record books but not properly indexed constitutes constructive notice to subsequent purchasers under Alaska’s recording statute.
2. Whether, absent constructive notice of Anglin’s prior deed, Lingo breached covenants of title in his warranty deed to Mortensen.

## Decision

- Judgment for Lingo (defendant); Mortensen’s breach-of-covenants claim failed.
- The court held Anglin’s unindexed deed did not give constructive notice to Lingo or subsequent grantees.
- Because Lingo took without actual or constructive notice and was first to achieve “duly recorded” status under the statutory scheme, his conveyance was protected against Anglin’s unindexed prior deed.
- Without constructive notice of a superior outstanding title at conveyance, Lingo was not liable to Mortensen for breach of covenants of title on these facts.

## Legal Principles

- Under Alaska’s recording statute, constructive notice arises only when the statutory recording process is completed, including required indexing.
- A deed recorded in deed books without proper indexing is not “duly recorded” for purposes of charging subsequent purchasers with constructive notice.
- A subsequent purchaser for value in good faith, without actual or constructive notice, is protected against a prior conveyance that was not properly recorded as the statute requires.
- Recording statutes are applied to avoid imposing an unreasonable search burden on purchasers who rely on the public index as the functional means of locating prior conveyances.

## Conclusion

The court treated indexing as a required part of effective recording for constructive notice and held that an unindexed deed, though copied into record books, did not bind later good-faith purchasers; therefore, Lingo was not liable to Mortensen for breach of covenants of title based on Anglin’s earlier but unindexed deed.


Mortensen v. Lingo, 99 F. Supp. 585 (D. Alaska 1951)