The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1880-01-17
LOCAL MATTERS.
where to Record Deeds for Suburban
prOperfy


Property.
The supreme Court, on Thur.dav. i'm IN
case of Burgess as. Ecivin, decided that M
clerks office Of the ChGncery Count Of Rich
mond was the proper place to record deed
conveying properly outside Of the city O
richmond ana within one mile thereof or
the horth SIDE OF james river, prior TO Acn
OF Assembly Of January 2G. 1877.
On the l>t day Of December. 1879. MARY
| {. Burgess, willow OF William Burgess
/ loaned 10 her brolhCr-in-aw, Rush Bur.
cess. Sl000 for five years, Rush BnrocS,
giving rs security a deed Of trust on ms
/ farm in Bowling Green, about three fourlhs
oi mile from lhe corporation line OF Rich.
mond, ana representing said fam TO be
irce from iDCumbraucOS. Mrs. HurreSS
Kept her Cccd abou, her house I'M.
III August. 1874, when She sent
II 10 Richmond by friend. she living in
fctcr>"UFg, To be recorded. The dccd was
taken to the clerks office of Hcnrico county
and placed on record there. On the 10Th of
December, 1876. the deed was carried TO the
clerks oiice OF the Chan1ery Court Cf Rich.
mOnd and piaccd on record there. because
/ taat was thought to he the proper place. the
property being within the jurisdiction Of
the Hastings Court OF the city OF Rich
mond-that Is, within one mile Of said city
on the north Size Of the James river.
1t afterwards TUNED out that Rush Bur-
CESS had conveyed the same property 10
BeiYln ana Fray>er, trustees, to secure 10
John B. Davis $3.50 by deed dated 9th Of
March, 1872; that this jCed was then re-
corden in The clerks Office OF Ucnrlco
county. but afterwards. on the 10Th OF De
cemOcr, 1876, recorded in the clerks Office
II ('hunpaVtr ( ~ Of D. a..
days later than Mrs. Burgess deed was re.
corded in that office.
In November. 1877, Belyin and Frayser.
trustees, advertised said property for sale
under the deed OF trust to nem dated March
-, 1872. Mrs. Burgess then fled bill in
the Cbancery Court OF Richmond, and pro-
cured an injunction restraining the sale OF
said property by said trustees. In her bill
She insisted that the clerks office OF the
Chancery Court OF Richmond was the pro-
per place TO record a deed conveying the
property in controversy, it being within one
mile OF the city limits; and her deed having
been recorded there on the 10th OF Decem-
uer, 1876, three days earlier than the deed to
Belyln and FrayScr, trustees, was recorded
there, 1t WAS entitled 10 priority, she claim
ed. Nj. Davis answered the bill. and in
sisted that the clerks Office of the county Of
Henrco was the proper place for recOrda-
ton, and not the ChanceIy-C0urt clerks
office. He also charged that Mrs. Burgess
bad notice Of bis deed. which was eXccu-
ted long anterior to hers. and that therefore
ii made no difference which Office was the
proper place for recOrdation, such notice
gave his deed priority.
On the 16'h January, 1879, Judge FdZ- |
hugh decided the case, affirming the view |
L,r hnt fi,n 4 'i,ot,
Count clerks Office was the proper place OF |
recordauon, and said that her deed, having |
been first recorded there. she was entitled !
TO priority, UHieSS she bad such notice OF !
the deed to Bclyin and Frayser, trustees, is
would defeat her right to priority; but The !
Judge was OF opinion that the weight OF |
evidence was TO the effect that she did have
such notice, and therefore the deed to Bel
vim and FraYSer, trustees, was entitled TO
priority. An appeal was taken from this
decision by Mrs. Burgess, and early in De-
cember last was argued by +. NJ. Conner,
Esq, for Mrs. Burgess, and III. G. Cannon,
Esq, for Mr.. Davis, and submitted. On
Judge MOncure delivered the
opinion OF the Court OF Appeals and sus-
tanned the view taken by the Chincery
Court upon the question of laW-that is, that
the Chancery Court clerks office was the pro-
per pldCe lOI tIe lCcOruatl0n or Salu QCeuS, |
but diSatlirmed the view taken by the Chan
Gerry Court that the priority thus given TO
Mrs. Burgess deed was detected by notice
10 her OF the deed for the benefit OF Mr.
Davis; and for that reason the decision OF
he Chancerv Court was reversed, and the
priority OF the deed for the benefit Of Mis-.
Burgess established.
1t is now therefore settled law that the
,lerk's office of the Chancery Court and the
Jerks Office OF the Hustings Court OF the
.ity OF Richmond prior to the creation OF
he Chancery Court were the proper Offices
n which TO record deeds conveying pro-
,erty outside of the city limits and within
me mile thereof until the passage OF the
ct Of Assembly Of January %, 1877, which
hanged the law, and required such deeds
o be recorded in the clerks office OF Hen
leo county.