R 4522.Ancient filed maps, surveys and records affecting real property.
Article 45. Evidence · Last amended 1963 · Last verified July 21, 2026
Full Text of CPLR 4522
Plain-English Summary
Old land records raise a practical problem: the people who made them are long gone, and no one is left to testify to how they were prepared. CPLR 4522 answers that problem with an age-based presumption. Any map, survey, or official record touching real property that has been on file for more than ten years in a county register's office, a county clerk's office, a court of record, or a department of the City of New York is prima facie evidence of what it contains.
The rule tracks the common-law treatment of ancient documents, but it applies specifically to the categories of real-property filings a title search or boundary dispute is likely to turn up: old surveys, recorded maps, deeds, and similar filings. Age alone triggers the presumption. The proponent does not need to establish who drew the map or how accurate the original survey work was.
As with the other prima facie evidence rules in this article, the presumption is rebuttable. A party can still challenge an ancient map or record with contrary proof; the statute only spares the proponent from having to authenticate decades-old paperwork through a witness who has no personal knowledge of how it was made.
Frequently Asked Questions
How old does a real property record have to be to qualify under CPLR 4522?
It must have been on file for more than ten years in one of the listed offices: a county register's office, a county clerk's office, a court of record, or a department of the City of New York.
What kinds of documents does CPLR 4522 cover?
Maps, surveys, and official records affecting real property, the sort of filings that come up in boundary disputes and title examinations.
Does the ten-year rule make an old survey conclusive proof of a boundary?
No. It makes the document prima facie evidence of its contents, so a party can still contest it with other proof.
Why does age matter for admitting these records?
Because after enough time passes, no witness with firsthand knowledge of how the map or record was prepared is likely available, so the law lets the filing's age and location substitute for live authentication.
Does CPLR 4522 apply outside New York City?
Yes. It applies to filings in any county register's or county clerk's office and any court of record statewide, in addition to New York City departments.
Advisory Committee Notes
This rule is the same as former § 389-a, except that the words “or any department of the city of New York” have been added in order to incorporate former § 389, which dealt with proof of public records in the city of New York. Section 389-a, which was added in 1923, applied throughout the state—apparently including New York city—and should have superseded § 389, which dated from the Code of Civil Procedure.
On its face, § 389-a was apparently not restricted to any particular type of record and it would appear to have covered such matters as statements made in affidavits filed with motion papers. The original legislation indicates, however, that the failure to restrict the section to records affecting real property was an oversight. Thus, chapter 360 of the laws of 1923, which enacted § 389-a, is entitled “An Act to amend the civil practice act, in relation to maps of real property and judgments, decrees or orders in actions in courts of record affecting real property as evidence.” This design harmonizes with the details of the section which excludes records kept by towns, cities and villages. Accordingly, this rule has been limited to records affecting real property. The twenty-year period appears to be completely arbitrary in view of former civil practice act sections making fifteen years instead of twenty years the basic time period in real property actions. CPA §§ 34–37; Laws 1932, c. 261–64. The period has been reduced to ten years in view of the identical reduction in statutes of limitation affecting real property. See CPLR § 212.
Section 389 has been limited in the same way as § 389-a, since the rule should be the same throughout the state. In considering the effect of this restriction it should be noted that a required certificate or affidavit of a public officer is prima facie evidence under CPLR rule 4520, marriage certificates are prima facie evidence of the marriage under rule 4526 and that the business records exception in rule 4518 is broad enough to cover public offices. Cf. Uniform Rules of Evidence, Rules 63(17), 63(19), 64. Moreover, the normal thirty-year ancient documents rule is applicable in other than real estate cases. Richardson, Evidence 324 (8th ed, Prince 1955).
The concluding phrase of both §§ 389 and 389-a of the CPA, “and shall be receivable in evidence as such upon any trial in any of the courts of this state in any controversy pending therein between any parties,” is omitted as unnecessary. These sections were directed to the hearsay problem of certain ancient documents affecting real property. They provided a special twenty-year rule different from the thirty-year rule applicable whether or not the document was filed. The problem of authentication which is apparently what is adverted to in this phrase is treated in CPLR rules 4534, 4537, 4538 and 4539.
Amendment History
Formerly § 4522, add, L 1962, ch 308; amd, L 1962, ch 315, § 1, eff Sept 1, 1963.