In the scenario where O conveys property to A (unrecorded) and then to B (as a gift), which party wins if B records?

In this scenario, the correct reasoning lies in the nature of property conveyances and the importance of recording documents in real estate transactions. When O conveys property to A, although that transfer is unrecorded, A remains the original grantee and holds an interest in the property.

Even though B records their conveyance from O, the priority of property rights typically favors the first grantee, which in this case is A, as they have a valid claim based on the initial transfer. The act of recording by B does not negate the rights of A because the transfer to A occurred first, regardless of whether it was recorded or not.

This principle is rooted in the doctrine of "first in time, first in right," which means that once A received the property, their interest takes precedence over any subsequent transfer, even if that subsequent transfer is recorded. Recordation primarily protects subsequent purchasers or creditors by giving them priority based on the timing of their recording, but it does not invalidate prior unrecorded interests.

Thus, in this case, A retains their rights to the property despite B's recording, making A the party who holds the superior claim.