Recording & Priority

Legal information, not legal advice. Verify against the cited primary sources before acting. Recording statutes, deadlines, and the priority they confer vary by jurisdiction and are frequently amended. Last verified: 2026-06-08.

• What it is: Recording is the act of entering the contract for deed (CFD) — or a short memorandum of it — in the county’s public real-property records so that the world has constructive notice of the buyer’s equitable interest. Priority is the rule that decides, when two interests in the same parcel conflict (the buyer’s CFD versus the seller’s later mortgage, judgment lien, or second sale), which one wins. Priority is governed by each state’s recording act, which comes in three flavors — pure race, notice, and race-notice — and by a handful of CFD-specific recording statutes that command recording on a deadline and attach their own consequences. Because a CFD buyer holds only an equitable interest (equitable-conversion, equitable-title) while the seller keeps record legal title until payoff, recording is the buyer’s single most important act of self-protection and, in several states, a statutory duty of the seller whose breach hands the buyer a remedy.

• Why it matters for contract-for-deed: The defining structural risk of a CFD is that the seller remains the record owner for years while the buyer pays. Anything that can attach to or convey the seller’s record title — a new mortgage, a docketed money judgment, a mechanic’s or tax lien, a fraudulent second sale, or the seller’s bankruptcy trustee — threatens the buyer. Recording is what converts the buyer’s private contract into a public, priority-bearing interest that later creditors and purchasers take subject to. It is also frequently the hinge of the remedy analysis: in Texas a recorded contract is “the same as a deed with a vendor’s lien” the seller can enforce only by foreclosure, not forfeiture (§ 5.079(a)) — recording strips the seller’s forfeiture remedy (forfeiture-vs-foreclosure). In Minnesota an unrecorded residential CFD cannot be cancelled under the statutory-cancellation track (statutory-cancellation). And recording is the buyer’s defense against the seller’s intervening liens and against the bankruptcy trustee’s strong-arm/bona-fide-purchaser powers (11 U.S.C. § 544). Recording and priority therefore touch formation, remedies, title, and bankruptcy at once.

• The three recording-act regimes (the universal backdrop): Every jurisdiction resolves competing interests under one of three classic recording statutes, and the type controls what recording buys the buyer:

  • Pure race — first to record wins, even if the later party knew of the earlier unrecorded interest. Notice is irrelevant; only the race to the recorder matters. The classic example is North Carolina’s Connor Act, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47-18: no conveyance “shall be valid to pass any property interest as against lien creditors or purchasers for a valuable consideration … but from the time of registration.” In a pure-race state, an unrecorded CFD buyer can lose to the seller’s later lien even if that lienholder knew of the contract — so recording is non-optional.
  • Notice — a later bona fide purchaser/creditor for value and without notice of the prior interest prevails over an earlier unrecorded one, whether or not the later party records first. Recording the CFD defeats this by giving constructive notice to everyone after. Florida is the model: Fla. Stat. § 695.01(1) makes an unrecorded conveyance/mortgage not “good and effectual in law or equity against creditors or subsequent purchasers for a valuable consideration and without notice, unless the same be recorded.”
  • Race-notice — the later party prevails only if it both took without notice and recorded first. Michigan is the example: MCL 565.29 makes an unrecorded conveyance “void as against any subsequent purchaser in good faith and for a valuable consideration … whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded.” A recorded CFD (or memorandum) “shall have the same force and effect, as to subsequent encumbrancers and purchasers, as the recording of deeds” (MCL 565.354).

  In all three, the buyer who records first and in good faith is protected; the buyer who sits on an unrecorded contract is exposed. The differences matter mostly at the margins (does the later lienholder’s knowledge of the CFD save the unrecorded buyer? — yes in notice/race-notice, no in pure race), but the operator lesson is identical: record.

• Memorandum vs. full contract: Where recording is permissive, the buyer usually records a memorandum of contract (a short instrument naming the parties, the property, and the existence of the CFD) rather than the full agreement, to give constructive notice while keeping the price and terms private. A recorded memorandum carries the same priority force as recording the contract itself (e.g., Michigan, MCL 565.354; Florida, § 695.01; Illinois, 765 ILCS 67/20). Where recording is mandated, the statute may require the full contract (Maryland RP § 10-102 requires recording the land installment contract itself, not a memorandum) or expressly allow a memorandum (Illinois, 765 ILCS 67/20). Check the governing statute before assuming a memorandum suffices.

• The CFD-specific recording mandates (who must record, by when, or else): A minority of states do more than offer priority — they command recording on a deadline and attach a consequence:

  • Texas — seller, 30 days. Tex. Prop. Code § 5.076(a): the seller “shall record the executory contract, including the attached disclosure statement … on or before the 30th day after the date the contract is executed.” Damages for noncompliance are capped at $500 per calendar year of noncompliance. But recording carries a double edge for the seller: a recorded executory contract “shall be the same as a deed with a vendor’s lien” enforceable by foreclosure sale … or by judicial foreclosure (§ 5.079(a)) — i.e., recording converts the instrument into a vendor’s-lien deed the seller can only foreclose, not forfeit. See texas, forfeiture-vs-foreclosure.
  • Ohio — vendor, 20 days. Ohio Rev. Code § 5313.02(C): within twenty days after both parties sign, the vendor “shall cause a copy of the contract to be recorded … and a copy of the contract to be delivered to the county auditor.” See ohio.
  • Maryland — vendor, 15 days, full contract, priority fixed by statute. RP § 10-102 requires the vendor to record the full land installment contract within 15 days; § 10-104 then fixes the recorded purchaser’s interest as prior to later-arising claims or liens against the property. Failure to record within 15 days gives the buyer an unconditional right to cancel before recording occurs. See maryland.
  • Illinois — seller, 10 business days, buyer-rescission backstop. 765 ILCS 67/20: the seller must record the contract or a memorandum within 10 business days of the date of sale; if the seller fails, “the buyer has the right to rescind the contract until such time as the seller records,” with a refund of all money paid (and a 90-day rescission window after discovering a clouded title). See illinois.
  • Minnesota — vendee within four months; vendor must record residential CFDs; unrecorded residential CFD can’t be statutorily cancelled. Minn. Stat. § 507.235 requires recording within four months (civil penalty of 2% of the contract debt on a vendee who fails, unless the vendor failed to furnish a recordable copy), and § 559.21 subd. 4b bars the seller from using statutory cancellation on an unrecorded residential CFD where the vendor made no good-faith recording effort — though judicial termination remains available. See minnesota, statutory-cancellation.

  Most other jurisdictions leave recording permissive — strongly advisable for priority and (in some states) for homestead eligibility, but not a statutory duty with its own penalty.

• Effect of the seller’s intervening liens and judgments on the buyer: Because the seller holds record legal title, the seller’s later mortgages, docketed money judgments, mechanic’s/tax liens, or even a fraudulent second conveyance can attach as clouds on the title the buyer is paying for. The recording act decides the contest:

  • If the buyer recorded first (or recorded before the later interest arose), the buyer generally prevails: the later lien/purchaser takes subject to the recorded CFD, because the buyer’s recorded interest is constructive notice (notice/race-notice states) or simply first in the race (pure-race states). Maryland codifies this directly — § 10-104 makes the recorded purchaser’s interest prior to later-arising claims or liens.
  • If the buyer’s CFD is unrecorded, a later bona fide lienholder or purchaser for value without notice can prime the buyer (notice/race-notice) or simply win the race (pure race). This is the classic CFD trap: the buyer pays for years, the seller borrows against or sells the “free” record title, and the unrecorded buyer is subordinated.
  • Caveat — prior recorded liens bind the buyer. Recording protects the buyer only against interests arising after the buyer records. A mortgage or lien already of record when the buyer takes the CFD is constructive notice to the buyer and is senior regardless of when the buyer records (this is the underlying-mortgage / wrap exposure — see wrap-around-mortgage, underlying-mortgage-wrap, garn-st-germain-due-on-sale). Recording fixes priority date; it does not erase a pre-existing senior lien.
  • Bankruptcy backstop. If the seller files bankruptcy, the trustee wields the strong-arm power of a hypothetical bona-fide purchaser / judicial-lien creditor under 11 U.S.C. § 544(a). A buyer whose interest was recorded before the petition generally defeats the strong-arm power; an unrecorded buyer is exposed. Recording is again the protection (see the §7 modules of the jurisdiction pages, e.g. michigan, minnesota).

• Operator takeaway: Treat recording as a closing-day, non-negotiable step, not an afterthought. (1) Know your recording-act type — pure race (north-carolina), notice (florida), or race-notice (michigan) — because in a pure-race state even a later lienholder with knowledge can prime an unrecorded buyer. (2) Know whether your state commands recording on a deadline — TX (seller, 30 days, § 5.076), OH (vendor, 20 days, § 5313.02(C)), MD (vendor, 15 days, full contract, § 10-102), IL (seller, 10 business days, 765 ILCS 67/20), MN (four months, § 507.235) — and calendar it; the penalty for missing is buyer rescission (IL, MD), money damages (TX), a 2%-of-debt civil penalty (MN), or loss of the statutory-cancellation remedy (MN). (3) Understand the recording trade for sellers — in Texas, recording the contract (which you must) converts it into a vendor’s-lien deed you can only foreclose, foreclosing the forfeiture remedy (§§ 5.076, 5.079). (4) Record the right instrument — full contract where the statute demands it (MD), a memorandum where privacy matters and the state allows it (MI, FL, IL). (5) Record promptly to beat the seller’s later creditors and to defeat a future trustee’s strong-arm power (11 U.S.C. § 544). An unrecorded CFD is the single most common way a paying buyer loses the property to the seller’s creditor — and, where recording is the seller’s statutory duty, the single most common way a seller’s remedy collapses.

▸ For Sellers / Operators — Recording is both a duty and a strategic election. (1) Calendar the statutory deadline in your state: TX § 5.076 (seller, 30 days; $500/yr damages), OH § 5313.02(C) (vendor, 20 days), MD § 10-102 (vendor, 15 days, full contract; miss it and the buyer can cancel), IL 765 ILCS 67/20 (seller, 10 business days; miss it and the buyer can rescind and recover everything paid), MN § 507.235 (four months). In permissive states, the buyer will (and should) record anyway. (2) Understand the remedy trade-off. In Texas, the contract you are required to record becomes “the same as a deed with a vendor’s lien” enforceable only by foreclosure (§ 5.079(a)) — recording is mandatory, but it forecloses your forfeiture remedy; plan your default playbook around judicial/trustee foreclosure, not forfeiture (forfeiture-vs-foreclosure). In Minnesota, an unrecorded residential CFD cannot be cancelled under § 559.21’s fast statutory track (subd. 4b) — recording is a precondition to your cheapest remedy. (3) Keep your own title clean. Do not place a new mortgage, let a judgment dock against you, or otherwise encumber record title in a way that subordinates the buyer you already sold to — in many states that is actionable, and in Ohio over-encumbering past the contract balance is statutorily barred (R.C. § 5313.02(B); see wrap-around-mortgage).

▸ For Buyers — You hold equitable title while the seller keeps record legal title (equitable-conversion). Until you record, the seller’s later mortgage, judgment lien, or second sale can prime your interest and you can lose the property you are paying for — and in a pure-race state (e.g. North Carolina) a later lienholder can beat you even if it knew about your contract. Record immediately — the full contract or a memorandum, whichever your state allows — and keep the recorder’s receipt. In MD, IL, MN, OH, and TX recording is partly the seller’s statutory duty, and the seller’s failure gives you leverage (cancellation in MD/IL, a recording-and-cancellation bar in MN). Recording is also what protects you against the seller’s bankruptcy trustee (11 U.S.C. § 544). Note: recording fixes your priority going forward — it does not wipe out a mortgage already of record when you bought, which is senior to you (underlying-mortgage-wrap).

Jurisdiction map

Positions are stated only where a retrieved primary source supports them. The recording-act type (pure race / notice / race-notice) governs every jurisdiction; the table below anchors the three regimes to a verified statute and then lists the states with CFD-specific recording mandates confirmed this run. States without a CFD-specific mandate still have a recording act of one of the three types — recording remains strongly advisable everywhere; the per-state §5 (Title, Recording & Wraps) modules carry the local detail.

Position	Jurisdiction(s)	Controlling authority (primary source)
Pure-race recording act — first to record wins, even against a later party with knowledge of the unrecorded CFD; notice is irrelevant	north-carolina	N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47-18 (Connor Act) — no conveyance valid against lien creditors/purchasers for value “but from the time of registration”
Notice recording act — a later BFP/creditor for value without notice beats an earlier unrecorded CFD; recording the CFD gives constructive notice and defeats this	florida	Fla. Stat. § 695.01(1) — unrecorded conveyance not “good … against creditors or subsequent purchasers for a valuable consideration and without notice, unless … recorded”
Race-notice recording act — a later party beats an unrecorded CFD only if it took without notice and recorded first; a recorded CFD/memorandum has “the same force and effect … as the recording of deeds”	michigan	Mich. Comp. Laws § 565.29 (race-notice act); § 565.354 (recorded land contract = same force/effect as recorded deed)
CFD-specific mandate — SELLER records within 30 days; recording converts the contract into a vendor’s-lien deed enforceable only by foreclosure	texas	Tex. Prop. Code § 5.076(a) (30-day seller recording duty; $500/yr damages cap); § 5.079(a) (recorded contract = deed with vendor’s lien, foreclosure-only)
CFD-specific mandate — VENDOR records within 20 days and delivers a copy to the county auditor	ohio	Ohio Rev. Code § 5313.02(C) — vendor “shall cause a copy of the contract to be recorded” within twenty days of signing
CFD-specific mandate — VENDOR records the FULL contract within 15 days; statute fixes recorded purchaser as prior to later liens; miss it → buyer may cancel	maryland	Md. Code, Real Prop. § 10-102 (15-day vendor recording duty; unconditional buyer cancel if missed); § 10-104 (recorded purchaser prior to later-arising claims/liens)
CFD-specific mandate — SELLER records contract or memorandum within 10 business days; failure → buyer may rescind and recover all sums paid	illinois	765 ILCS 67/20 — 10-business-day seller recording duty; buyer rescission until recording (+90-day window on clouded title)
CFD-specific mandate — recording within four months (2% civil penalty); UNrecorded residential CFD cannot be statutorily cancelled	minnesota	Minn. Stat. § 507.235 (four-month recording; 2%-of-debt vendee penalty); § 559.21 subd. 4b (no statutory cancellation of unrecorded residential CFD absent good-faith recording effort; judicial termination preserved)
Permissive recording — no CFD-specific mandate; priority governed by the state’s general recording act (one of the three types); recording strongly advisable (representative; the majority)	alabama · arizona · colorado · missouri · oklahoma · tennessee · mississippi · kentucky	Each state’s general recording act controls priority; CFD/memorandum recordable; per-state §5 modules carry the local statute and recording-act type

How the regimes compare

• The recording-act type sets the default; CFD statutes override at the margins. In a pure-race state (north-carolina, § 47-18), the buyer who fails to register can be beaten by a later lien creditor or purchaser even if that party had actual knowledge of the CFD — registration, not notice, decides. In a notice state (florida, § 695.01), recording the CFD gives constructive notice that defeats any later “purchaser … without notice.” In a race-notice state (michigan, § 565.29), the later party must both lack notice and win the race. For the CFD buyer the practical instruction collapses to one word in all three — record — but the pure-race rule is the harshest on a sleeping buyer.

• Texas — recording is mandatory and remedy-defining. § 5.076 makes recording the seller’s duty within 30 days, and § 5.079(a) makes the recorded contract “the same as a deed with a vendor’s lien” enforceable only by foreclosure (sale under § 5.066 or judicial foreclosure). The seller cannot both record (as required) and keep a forfeiture remedy — recording converts the deal into a foreclosable vendor’s-lien arrangement. This is the clearest example in the country of recording driving the remedy outcome, not just priority. See texas, forfeiture-vs-foreclosure.

• Maryland — the statute does the priority work for the buyer. Rather than leave priority to the general recording act, RP § 10-104 affirmatively fixes the recorded land-installment purchaser’s interest as prior to later-arising claims or liens, and § 10-102 makes recording the vendor’s 15-day duty (full contract, not a memorandum) with buyer cancellation as the penalty for default. Maryland thus hard-wires the buyer’s priority and arms the buyer with a self-help exit if the vendor fails to record. See maryland.

• Illinois — recording duty backed by rescission. 765 ILCS 67/20 puts the recording duty on the seller (10 business days) and backs it with the strongest buyer remedy in the set: rescission and a full refund of everything paid, plus a 90-day rescission window if a title problem later surfaces. The seller’s incentive to record is therefore the threat of unwinding the entire deal. See illinois.

• Ohio — short, clean recording duty. § 5313.02(C) is a simple 20-day vendor recording mandate (plus delivery to the county auditor). It sits alongside Ohio’s anti-over-encumbrance rule (§ 5313.02(B)) and judicial-foreclosure requirement for longer/higher-equity contracts (§ 5313.07) to make Ohio a comparatively buyer-protective regime. See ohio.

• Minnesota — recording as a gate to the seller’s fast remedy. § 507.235 sets a four-month recording window with a 2%-of-debt civil penalty on a non-recording vendee, but the sharper rule is § 559.21 subd. 4b: a vendor may not statutorily cancel an unrecorded residential CFD where the vendor made no good-faith recording effort (judicial termination survives). Recording is thus a precondition to the seller’s cheapest, fastest exit. See minnesota, statutory-cancellation.

• The majority — permissive recording under a general recording act. Most jurisdictions impose no CFD-specific recording deadline; priority is governed by the state’s general recording statute (pure race, notice, or race-notice), and the CFD or a memorandum is freely recordable. The absence of a mandate is not the absence of risk: an unrecorded buyer in any of these states is exposed to the seller’s later creditors and to the seller’s bankruptcy trustee. Operators and buyers should record as a matter of course; the per-state §5 modules identify the local recording-act type and any local formalities. See alabama, arizona, colorado, missouri, oklahoma, tennessee, mississippi, kentucky.

Primary sources (retrieved 2026-06-08)

• N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47-18 (Connor Act; pure-race) — no conveyance valid “as against lien creditors or purchasers for a valuable consideration … but from the time of registration thereof in the county where the land lies.” https://www.ncleg.gov/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_47/GS_47-18.pdf
• Fla. Stat. § 695.01(1) (notice recording act) — unrecorded conveyance/mortgage not “good and effectual in law or equity against creditors or subsequent purchasers for a valuable consideration and without notice, unless the same be recorded.” https://www.flsenate.gov/Laws/Statutes/2024/695.01
• Mich. Comp. Laws § 565.29 (race-notice act) — unrecorded conveyance “void as against any subsequent purchaser in good faith and for a valuable consideration … whose conveyance shall be first duly recorded.” https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-565-29
• Mich. Comp. Laws § 565.354 — a recorded, acknowledged land contract “shall have the same force and effect, as to subsequent encumbrancers and purchasers, as the recording of deeds.” (Confirmed on the Michigan jurisdiction page from a prior retrieval; URL below.) https://www.legislature.mi.gov/Laws/MCL?objectName=MCL-565-354
• Tex. Prop. Code § 5.076(a) — the seller “shall record the executory contract … on or before the 30th day after the date the contract is executed”; noncompliance damages capped at “$500 for each calendar year of noncompliance.” https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._prop._code_section_5.076
• Tex. Prop. Code § 5.079(a) — “A recorded executory contract shall be the same as a deed with a vendor’s lien,” enforceable “by foreclosure sale under Section 5.066 … or by judicial foreclosure.” https://texas.public.law/statutes/tex._prop._code_section_5.079
• Ohio Rev. Code § 5313.02(C) — within twenty days after both parties sign, the vendor “shall cause a copy of the contract to be recorded … and a copy of the contract to be delivered to the county auditor.” https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-5313.02
• Md. Code, Real Prop. § 10-102 — vendor must record the land installment contract within 15 days; failure gives the purchaser an unconditional right to cancel before recording. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=grp&section=10-102&enactments=false
• Md. Code, Real Prop. § 10-104 — after recording, the property is held “subject to the rights and interest of the purchaser,” fixing the recorded purchaser’s interest as prior to later-arising claims or liens. https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Laws/StatuteText?article=grp&section=10-104&enactments=false
• 765 ILCS 67/20 — seller must record the contract or a memorandum “within 10 business days of the date of sale”; if not, “the buyer has the right to rescind the contract until such time as the seller records,” with a refund of all money paid. https://ilga.gov/documents/legislation/ilcs/documents/076500670K20.htm
• Minn. Stat. § 507.235 — contracts for deed “shall be recorded by the vendee within four months”; non-recording vendee owes a civil penalty “equal to two percent of the principal amount of the contract debt,” unless the vendor failed to furnish a recordable copy; residential vendors must record. https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/507.235
• Minn. Stat. § 559.21 subd. 4b — “a vendor may not terminate a contract for deed under this section if the contract has not been recorded as required under section 507.235 … and the vendor has failed to make a good faith effort to record”; “Nothing contained in this subdivision bars judicial termination of a contract for deed.” https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/559.21

Meta

• needs_verification:
  • The recording-act type (pure race / notice / race-notice) for the majority of jurisdictions beyond the three anchored here (NC pure race, FL notice, MI race-notice). Most states are notice or race-notice and a few are pure race (e.g., Louisiana and, by reputation, NC), but each unlisted state’s general recording statute should be retrieved and classified before relying on it in a priority dispute. The per-state §5 modules note the local recording mechanics but do not all yet state the statutory type with a pinpoint citation.
  • Whether any additional jurisdictions impose a CFD-specific recording deadline beyond TX, OH, MD, IL, MN (and the residential nuance in others). A statute-by- statute sweep of the remaining 51 jurisdictions’ CFD chapters is needed to confirm the list is exhaustive; absence of a mandate was inferred, not separately retrieved this run, for the “permissive” representatives.
  • The precise bankruptcy interaction (11 U.S.C. § 544 strong-arm vs. a recorded CFD treated as an executory contract under § 365 in some circuits) varies by how a given state characterizes the CFD (executory-contract vs. secured debt); the §7 modules of the jurisdiction pages carry this, but a unified concept treatment of recording’s effect on the trustee’s avoiding powers was not separately verified here.
  • Whether Maryland § 10-102 permits a memorandum in lieu of the full contract in any circumstance, and the exact mechanics of the “stated on the contract itself” requirement, were taken from the Maryland page’s prior retrieval of § 10-102; the § 10-104 priority language was re-verified this run, but the § 10-102 full text was not re-fetched verbatim this run.
• open_questions:
  • In a pure-race state, does a CFD buyer who recorded a memorandum (not the full contract) take priority to the same extent as one who recorded the contract? Generally yes if the memorandum satisfies the registration statute’s formalities, but the answer turns on each state’s memorandum-sufficiency rule — track per state.
  • When the seller’s later judgment lien attaches between CFD execution and the buyer’s recording, which controls — the lien’s docketing date or the buyer’s later recording date? Resolves on the recording-act type (notice vs. race-notice vs. pure race) and on whether a judgment creditor counts as a “purchaser for value” under the state act; normalize on each jurisdiction page.
  • Does recording a CFD trigger transfer/recordation or documentary-stamp tax at the contract stage (as in Florida and Maryland) or only at deed delivery? Tax timing is tracked in the §6 modules; cross-reference where recording is mandatory.
• cross_links: equitable-conversion · equitable-title · forfeiture-vs-foreclosure · statutory-cancellation · executory-contract · wrap-around-mortgage · underlying-mortgage-wrap · garn-st-germain-due-on-sale · quiet-title-after-cancellation · texas · ohio · maryland · illinois · minnesota · michigan · north-carolina · florida · alabama · arizona · colorado · missouri · oklahoma · tennessee · mississippi · kentucky
• changelog:
  • 2026-06-08 — Page created. Defined recording and priority for CFDs; set out the three recording-act regimes (pure race / notice / race-notice) anchored to retrieved primary sources (N.C. Gen. Stat. § 47-18; Fla. Stat. § 695.01; Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 565.29, 565.354); catalogued the CFD-specific recording mandates with deadlines and consequences (Tex. Prop. Code §§ 5.076, 5.079; Ohio Rev. Code § 5313.02(C); Md. Real Prop. §§ 10-102, 10-104; 765 ILCS 67/20; Minn. Stat. §§ 507.235, 559.21 subd. 4b); analyzed the effect of the seller’s intervening liens/judgments and the bankruptcy strong-arm power (11 U.S.C. § 544). Flagged the unclassified recording-act types for the remaining jurisdictions and the completeness of the CFD-mandate list under needs_verification.

---

Disclaimer. This page is legal information, not legal advice, and may be out of date. Recording statutes, deadlines, the priority they confer, and the classification of each state’s recording act change and turn on the specific instrument recorded and the order in which competing interests arise. Confirm the current statute, your state’s recording-act type, and that any cited authority is still good law before recording, relying on priority, or structuring a deal, and consult a licensed attorney in the relevant jurisdiction.