Property research is a cornerstone of real estate transactions, title insurance, and land use planning. Abstractors, title examiners, and attorneys rely on public records to trace ownership, uncover liens, and confirm legal boundaries. Traditionally, property records have been organized in two primary ways: grantor/grantee index books and legal description index books. While both serve the same overarching purpose—tracking the history and status of a parcel—they do so in very different ways, each presenting unique challenges and complexities.
Grantor/Grantee Index Books: Tracing Through Names
The grantor/grantee index system organizes property records by the names of parties involved in transactions. Every deed, mortgage, easement, or lien is indexed under the name of the grantor (seller, borrower, or party giving an interest) and the grantee (buyer, lender, or recipient of an interest).
Challenges:
- Name Variations and Misspellings: Human error in recording or spelling can make it difficult to ensure all records tied to an individual are captured. A single typo can obscure a crucial deed.
- Common Names: In areas with many people sharing the same last name, distinguishing between different “John Smiths” becomes tedious and error-prone.
- Name Changes Over Time: Marriage, divorce, or corporate mergers can complicate the trail, requiring researchers to know every potential variation of a party’s name.
- Time-Intensive: Researching multiple decades often means combing through hundreds of index pages across many volumes, increasing the risk of oversight.
- Indirect Connection to the Property: Because indexing is name-based, a researcher must know who owned or transacted on the property before being able to locate records. This makes it less efficient if only the legal description is known.
Example:
Imagine an abstractor is researching a 40-acre farm once owned by William Johnson. In the grantor/grantee index, they must search under “Johnson, William” for sales, mortgages, or liens. But what if his name was also recorded at times as “Wm. Johnson” or “Bill Johnson”? The researcher must check every variation to avoid missing a critical mortgage release or deed. And if Johnson sold only half the parcel to his son, that partial transfer may not be obvious without carefully piecing together multiple entries under different family names.
Legal Description Index Books: Organizing by the Land Itself
The legal description index system organizes records by the land parcel rather than by the people involved. Documents are indexed according to metes and bounds, subdivision lots, or government survey descriptions (township, range, and section).
Challenges:
- Complex Legal Descriptions: Metes and bounds descriptions can be lengthy and technical, requiring a strong understanding of surveying language. Small errors in interpretation can misidentify a parcel.
- Changes Over Time: Subdivision plats, parcel splits, and consolidations can alter how a property is described, creating a fragmented record trail.
- Clerical Inconsistencies: Different clerks may abbreviate or record legal descriptions inconsistently, making searches more difficult.
- Limited Availability: Not all jurisdictions maintain a legal description index. In many places, the grantor/grantee method remains the sole system, forcing researchers to work with names instead of land identifiers.
- Learning Curve: Unlike looking up a name, using a legal description index requires familiarity with survey systems and how they are applied in the local jurisdiction.
Example:
Suppose the same 40-acre farm is legally described as “The NW ¼ of the SE ¼ of Section 14, Township 9 North, Range 5 East.” In a legal description index, the abstractor can go directly to Section 14 of the township and pull every deed, mortgage, or easement affecting that quarter-quarter section. This is efficient because it ties directly to the land—but if a clerk once abbreviated it incorrectly as “NW ¼ SE ¼ Sec 14, T9N, R5” or if part of the land was later subdivided into smaller lots, the researcher must track those variations and subdivisions to capture the entire chain of title.
Comparing the Two Systems
- Grantor/Grantee Index: Easier for name-based searches but indirect when tracing a parcel’s complete history. Susceptible to human error in names.
- Legal Description Index: Tied directly to the land, making it more precise for tracking property over time. However, it requires specialized knowledge and can be inconsistent if parcel boundaries have changed.
In practice, many abstractors and title professionals must use both systems together to ensure accuracy. For example, a deed might be discovered under the legal description index that wasn’t found under a misspelled name in the grantor/grantee index, or vice versa.
Conclusion
Researching property records is rarely straightforward. The grantor/grantee index offers accessibility through names but risks errors from misspellings, duplications, or incomplete ownership trails. The legal description index provides land-specific accuracy but introduces its own complexities in interpretation and consistency. Together, these systems highlight the dual nature of property research: a balance between human identity and the enduring identity of the land itself.
As more records are digitized, hybrid systems combining name-based and land-based searches are becoming the standard, reducing—but not eliminating—the challenges abstractors have faced for generations.
Please note: Any opinions discussed in this article belong solely to the author, Marissa Berends, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Capitol Lien.
About the Author
Marissa Berends is a Certified Abstractor and Industry Relations Coordinator at Capitol Lien, a nationwide due diligence and risk mitigation services provider. Since joining the company in September 2021, she has earned abstractor certifications in Minnesota, Nebraska, and North Dakota. She is pursuing her Wisconsin Title Examiner certification, which is expected to be completed in Fall 2025.
Marissa is involved with the following groups: Wisconsin Land Title Association’s (WLTA) Convention Committee & Young Title Professionals; Nebraska Land Title Association’s (NLTA) Convention Committee; Property Record Industry Association (PRIA) National Education Committee; Illinois Land Title Association’s (ILTA) Inclusion, Diversity, Equity & Acceptance (IDEA) Committee; and the National Association of Land Title Examiners and Abstractors (NALTEA).
About Capitol Lien
Capitol Lien empowers real estate and title professionals with trusted public record research and due diligence services nationwide. With 35 years of experience, Capitol Lien specializes in fast, accurate property and title searches, lien reports, and document retrieval that help title agents, underwriters, and legal teams operate their businesses with confidence. The Capitol Lien team takes the hassle out of title research with local experts and innovative tools that make it easier to mitigate risk, stay on schedule, and keep your closings moving smoothly.
Learn more at capitollien.com. Ready to simplify your title research? Send your next order to Capitol Lien and experience the difference trusted diligence makes. Stay in touch with Capitol Lien on LinkedIn for industry updates and information. Reach out! contact@capitollien.com or 800-845-4077.