Myers v. Key Bank, 68 N.Y.2d 744 (1986)
Recording a deed creates a presumption of delivery and thus valid transfer of ownership, which must be overcome by sufficient evidence to the contrary.
Summary
This case addresses the presumption of deed delivery when a deed is recorded. Key Bank sought to enforce a lien on property owned by Myers based on a judgment against Dolores Clark, who had guaranteed a loan. Myers had purchased the property from Clark, who had received the property via a deed from her deceased husband. Myers argued the deed to Clark was never delivered, making it void and thus preventing Key Bank’s lien from attaching. The court held that the recording of the deed created a presumption of delivery and ownership in favor of Clark, and Myers failed to provide sufficient evidence to overcome this presumption.
Facts
Dolores Clark guaranteed a loan from Key Bank to 340 Main Street Corp.
Clark had previously included the subject property in a list of her assets provided to Key Bank as part of the loan application.
A title search would have revealed a recorded deed transferring the property from her deceased husband, Robert Clark, to her.
Myers purchased the property from Clark in her capacity as executrix of her husband’s estate.
Key Bank initiated procedures to enforce a lien on the property to satisfy a default judgment against Clark.
Procedural History
Myers and Dime Savings Bank brought a proceeding against Key Bank pursuant to CPLR 5239 to determine the parties’ rights in the property.
The lower courts ruled in favor of Key Bank, upholding the validity of the lien.
The Appellate Division affirmed the lower court’s decision.
The case was appealed to the New York Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether the evidence presented by Myers was sufficient to overcome the presumption of delivery of the deed to Dolores Clark resulting from its recording, and thus invalidate Key Bank’s lien on the property.
Holding
No, because the evidence submitted by Myers was insufficient to overcome the presumption of delivery of the deed and Dolores Clark’s record ownership of the subject property resulting from the recording of the deed to her from Robert Clark.
Court’s Reasoning
The court relied on the established legal principle that recording a deed creates a presumption of delivery. The court cited Sweetland v Buell, 164 NY 541, 552 and Rametta v Kazlo, 68 AD2d 579, 581, affirming this principle.
The Court stated, “The evidence submitted by petitioners is insufficient to overcome the presumption of delivery of the deed and Dolores Clark’s record ownership of the subject property resulting from the recording of the deed to her from Robert Clark… together with her other conduct with respect to the property.”
The court highlighted that along with the recorded deed, Dolores Clark acted as if she owned the property. She included the property as an asset on her loan application. This further supported the presumption of delivery.
Since Myers failed to present sufficient evidence to rebut this presumption, the court upheld the validity of the deed to Clark. As a result, Key Bank’s lien against Clark was valid and could be enforced against the property Myers purchased.
This case reinforces the importance of properly challenging a recorded deed with sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption of delivery. Absent such evidence, the recorded deed stands as proof of ownership.