Laserfiche WebLink
City of Orono that the easement was in any way invalid. Rather, <br /> the petitioners were informed of just the opposite, that the lake <br /> access easement was a valid appurtenance to the Letendre parcel. <br /> It is the position of the petitioners that, under the recording <br /> act and under the Torrens act, the Petitioners are purchasers in <br /> good faith and for valuable consideration of the property, <br /> including the easement, and that any alleged unrecorded right of <br /> the City of Orono to keep the property free of riparian rights is <br /> void. <br /> ARGUMENT <br /> MS §507.34 , states, in pertinent part, <br /> "Every conveyance of real estate shall be recorded <br /> in the office of the county recorder of the county <br /> where such real estate is situated; and every such <br /> conveyance not so recorded shall be void as against <br /> any subsequent purchaser in good faith and for valu- <br /> able consideration of the same real estate where any <br /> part thereof, whose conveyance is first duly <br /> recorded, and as against any attachment levied <br /> thereon or any judgment lawfully obtained at the <br /> suit of any party against the person in whose name <br /> the title of such land appears of record prior to <br /> the recording of such conveyance." <br /> This statute, part of the "recording act" annunciates one <br /> of the most fundamental doctrines of Minnesota real estate law: <br /> An unnrecorded conveyance is void as against subsequent purchases <br /> in good faith and for valuable consideration of the same real <br /> estate or any part thereof whose conveyance is first duly <br /> recorded. (see eg 16 Dunnell Minn. Digest 2d "Recording Act" <br /> §4.00 et seq [3rd 3d 1980] ) . Any grantees thus deprived of their <br /> property are left with an action against the original <br /> -3- <br />