Most counties in Ohio are now imaging the documents, and before that they did send them out to be put on microfilm for preservations purposes.  The marginal notation is a great way to find releases, assignments and subordinations because they are noted right on the documents they reference.  This makes it less likely that a later document will be missed in the event it is mis-indexed, or the abstractor just has a bad day (we all know that happens, too). 

Today, marginal notations aren't written directly on the document because there are no paper copies to write on. Instead, most counties make a notation on the computer index as a reference to the assignment, release, subordination, etc.  Personally, I would still prefer them to be added to the document so you can see if when you print it out (I'm sure our clients would like that, too).  The technology exists to make an annotation on a digital image, but I'm not aware of any county that does it. In my opinion, that puts the counties in violation of the Ohio Revised Code for failing to make such notations, but this is an area where the counties have chosen to ignore the literal interpretation of the law because it doesn't mesh well with their new technology.

I wish they would ignore the literal interpretation of H.B. 525, which they are using to assess an extra $20 fee on documents where the borrower initials, notary stamp, or page numbers encroach on the 1" reserved side or bottom margins (no matter how slightly), or the page number is in a 9pt font instead of a 10pt font.  No... that one they read very literally... but I digress.

Back to marginal notations. I think they are great and they should be required and actually made.  It doesn't have to interfere with the imaging or other means of preservation.  New technology should not be an excuse to make the public records less reliable.

Best,
Robert A. Franco
SOURCE OF TITLE