Opinion ID: 1940855
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Recording Error

Text: The plaintiff also argues that, even if this Court should hold that the easement rights were assignable, the error in listing the wrong page number of the easement in the common master deed should invalidate the assignment. Further, plaintiff argues that he did not have constructive notice of the assignment and that he therefore qualifies as a bona fide purchaser for value without notice and holds title to the Post Road parcel free of any easement rights that Narragansett Electric might otherwise have. The trial court properly rejected plaintiff's argument in this regard and found, based on trial testimony and plaintiff's own judicial admissions in his complaint, that plaintiff had actual notice that the Post Road parcel was subject to the easement and that, therefore, he was not a bona fide purchaser without notice. Both Jeffrey Campopiano (the engineer hired by plaintiff) and Michael DiNezza (a representative of Narragansett Electric) testified that, in October of 2004, they discussed plaintiff's plans to construct the proposed car wash on the Post Road parcel; it was noted at that time that the planned structure would lie partly within the easement. The plaintiff did not purchase the Post Road parcel until December 16, 2004 i.e., two months after Mr. DiNezza advised Mr. Campopiano that Narragansett Electric had a policy of not allowing structures within its easements. A conveyance is valid and binding against a purchaser of property if that purchaser has notice of the conveyance, despite a recording error. Providence & Worcester Co. v. Blue Ribbon Beef Co., 463 A.2d 1313, 1318 (R.I.1983); see also G.L. 1956 § 34-11-1 (Every conveyance of lands, tenements or hereditament absolutely, by way of mortgage, or on condition    shall be void unless made in writing duly signed    delivered, and recorded in the records of land evidence in the town or city    however,    those having notice thereof, shall be valid and binding though not acknowledged or recorded.); Wild v. Constantini, 415 Mass. 663, 615 N.E.2d 557, 560 (1993) ([A] subsequent purchaser with actual notice is bound by such notice, even if the encumbrance is not set forth on the certificate.); 66 Am. Jur.2d Records and Recording Laws § 166 at 162 (2001) (The view generally prevailing    is that if a purchaser has actually seen or heard of the record of a prior conveyance or mortgage, he or she is deemed a purchaser with actual notice although the record is fatally defective.); 28A Corpus Juris Secundum Easements § 134 at 338-39 (2008) (One who purchases land subject to an easement, especially where it is expressly made so subject, or with knowledge or notice, actual, constructive or implied, that the property is burdened with an existing easement, takes the land subject to the easement.). Since Mr. Campopiano, acting on plaintiff's behalf, contacted Narragansett Electric to seek to obtain its consent to the proposed car wash even before plaintiff purchased the Post Road parcel, it is clear from the record and from plaintiff's own judicial admissions [10] that he had actual notice of the easement and Narragansett Electric's easement rights with respect to the Post Road parcel. Additionally, notwithstanding the incorrect page number listed on the common master deed, plaintiff's title examiner, Mr. Grant, testified that he found the easement reference, determined the existence of the easement, and noted that the easement was referred to in plaintiff's deed. Since plaintiff had actual notice of the easement encumbering the Post Road parcel prior to purchasing the property, the mistaken page number referenced in the common master deed is not fatal to Narragansett Electric's ability to enforce its easement rights. Accordingly, we perceive no basis for ruling that the trial justice erred when he found that plaintiff had actual notice of Narragansett Electric's easement rights on the Post Road parcel.