Every county recorder shall keep an index, to be denominated as a grantor's and grantee's reception index, which shall contain the following information: date of reception, year, month, day, hour and minute, grantor and grantee, where situated, to whom delivered after recording, fees received, instrument number, and kind of instrument.
The recorder shall enter in the index, in the order and manner aforesaid, as soon as the same are received, all deeds and other instruments authorized by law to be recorded. The reception index shall be maintained in alphabetical order, and every entry made therein shall be made in the reception index under the grantor's surname, and under the grantee's surname, and all such entries shall appear therein consecutively and in the order as to time in which the instruments were received. The recorder shall make an entry in the record immediately for each instrument recorded specifying the time of the day, month, and year when the same was recorded.
Notes of Decisions
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger, 782 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. 2010).
· cites it 3× “§ 386.03; 2. a consecutive index of all records showing the number of the instrument consecutively and the time of its reception, Minn.”
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger, 762 N.W.2d 278 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 3× “Minn. Stat. § 386.03 (2008). Some counties also maintained a tract index, but it was not until 2005 that the legislature amended section 386.”
Ries v. Ibach (In re Ibach), 399 B.R. 61 (Bankr. D. Minn. 2008).
· cites it 2× “Compare Minn.Stat. § 386.03 (2004) ("Every county recorder shall keep two books, to be denominated, respectively, the grantor’s and grantee’s reception book .”
Cohler v. Smith, 158 N.W.2d 574 (Minn. 1968).
“The court assumed that under statutory requirements reference to the Secondary mortgage did appear in the grantor and grantee index required by § 386.03. Nevertheless, it does not follow that plaintiffs are entitled to the relief which they requested when the record herein is…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.