§ 508.54

Imperial Developers, Inc. v. Calhoun Development, LLC · 2010 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

In Re Collier · 2007 1 citation

at 830 (citing Minn. Stat. § 508.54 (2004)). The court concluded that because M & I failed to file its mortgage on Conley’s property with the Ramsey County Registrar of Titles, M & I did not have an interest in the property that affected subsequent purchasers such as Collier, and instead had only a private contract with Conley. Id. at 831. The court further concluded that “[ajctual notice of a private contract is not the type of notice that prevents a purchaser from being a good-faith purchaser.” Id. The court reasoned that Collier’s actual notice of M & I’s private contract with Conley was not inconsistent with his own purchase of Conley’s interest in the property, because under the Torrens Act, the land was unencumbered by M & I’s interest. Id.

In re Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc. · 2013 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Somsen, Mueller, Lowther & Franta, PA v. Estates of Olsen · 2010 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Imperial Developers, Inc. v. Calhoun Development, LLC · 2009 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

In Re Collier · 2006 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

In Re Ocwen Financial Services, Inc. · 2002 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Fingerhut Corp. v. Suburban National Bank · 1990 1 citation

Minn. Stat. § 508.54 (1988) (emphasis added). Therefore, before its registration, Suburban’s mortgage was effective only as a contract between it and the Connellys; the mortgage could not affect the land. Id.; Minn. Stat. § 508.47, subd. 1.