We reserve the right to edit, classify or refuse to publish any material submitted by a comment and/or information provider. While we take every precautionary measure to prevent inappropriate, inflammatory material we cannot rule-out such stray incidents. We request all the users to maintain proper decorum and let us continue and excel in providing this interaction service to our community.
We are a consortium of legal professionals, paralegals and journalists. We are not all attorneys. We do not play one on TV. Nothing in this entire blog should be construed as legal advice. If you need legal advice you should consult an attorney.
PAID ENDORSEMENT DISCLOSURE: In order for us to support the blogging activities, we may receive monetary compensation or other types of remuneration for endorsement, recommendation, testimonial and/or link to any products or services from this blog.
The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It was adopted on December 15, 1791, as one of the ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights.
DeadlyClear advocates for transparency and accountability in an effort to preserve the rights guaranteed to the press under the First Amendment and strengthen the public’s right to know.
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate and HarvestRight™ Affiliate we earn from qualifying purchases. If you purchase a product or service with the links we provide, we may receive a small commission. There is no additional charge to you for those associate links and your support helps us to provide free content on our websites.
DeadlyClear® is a product of Project Maui, Inc., a Hawaii corporation. Copyright 2012-2026. All rights reserved.
Deadly Clear 
Some states, way I get it, require assignments to be recorded. But, whether they do or not and whether or not they’re recorded concurrently with the (alleged) event, if an assignment isn’t delivered to the transferee, it has the same effect as that of an undelivered deed: none. If an assignment were executed and delivered, but not recorded, it’s still effective between the transferor and transferee IF the assignee accepted it. It doesn’t, though, impart Notice to anyone else and puts the transferee at risk of recordings which may become senior. And some like Zitta in AZ were able to avoid an unrecorded assignment in bk cases (as could his bk trustee have done – his was an 11). Banksters don’t like that of, course (and I’ve only seen it in bk cases even though also imo a bk court doesn’t have exclusivity on the laws of recordation and notice), so they’re either hard at work getting the laws changed if they haven’t already, post-Zitta and others. If homeowner attorneys are awake, evidence of delivery of an assignment and acceptance by the transferee should be an issue. I can’t prove it, but I still say an assignment requires acceptance (just like a deed). Otherwise when I’m being sued on an underwater property, as an example, I could just deed it to some foo’ and try to make him deal with it.