With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". probate proceedings. We cannot, however, extend the concept of constructive notice to Smith’s claims. Constructive notice is usually applied when a person knows where to find the relevant information but failed to seek it out. See Champlin Oil & Refining Co. v. Chastain, 403 S.W.2d 376, 388 (Tex.1965) (“Means of knowledge with the duty of using them are in equity equivalent to knowledge itself.”) (quoting Hexter v. Pratt, 10 S.W.2d 692, 693 (Tex.Comm’n App.1928, judgm’t adopted) (emphasis added)); see also “Moore” Burger, Inc. v. Phillips Petroleum Co., 492 S.W.2d 934, 939 (Tex.1972) (charging purchaser of real property with constructive notice of facts that would have been revealed if inquiry of lessee had been made); Southwest Title Ins. Co. v. Woods, 449 S.W.2d 773, 774 (Tex.1970) (<HOLDING>). At the time Lula Little’s will was filed for

A: holding that recorded instrument not in chain of title does not establish constructive notice
B: holding that a subsequent encumbrancer was charged with constructive notice of an obligation to execute a second mortgage contained in filed instrument
C: holding that title ii does not apply to the states
D: holding that implied easement arose because each deed in chain of title referenced community plan
A.