It was not until after Swanson purchased the property that the trial court complied with the Marks v. Millman mandate by vacating the mortgage discharge judgment assuming it was involved. Her timely appeal to this Court followed. Slachter argues that Swanson was not a bona fide purchaser because he had implied actual knowledge of the Millman mortgage. She posits that a reasonably prudent person, upon seeing the trial court's discharge of the mortgage judgment in the Official Records would have investigated to see if it had been appealed. He states that after examining the Official Records, he was without knowledge of the viability of the mortgage, there being nothing therein affecting title after the recorded judgment which discharged the Millman mortgage.
Constructive knowledge is a legal fiction imputed primarily for the promotion of sound policy.
Actual notice is express, direct information. Id. Implied actual notice arises when a subsequent purchaser has the means of knowledge, and the duty to investigate but does not. Slachter's claim that Swanson had implied actual knowledge of the reinstatement of the Millman mortgage was not demonstrated by her. If, in fact, the mortgage was one of the many included in the Marks v. Millman appeal, such certainly was not readily ascertainable. Marion Slachter's name appears nowhere in Marks.