please answer correctly in 3-5 sentences for both short scenerios (48.1) and (49.1).

thank you!

48.1 Recording Statute Burl Brunson purchased a parcel of real property in Newark. New Jersey. The deed for the property was properly recorded and indexed by the county recorder. Subsequently, Brunson borrowed \$50,000 from The Howard Savings Bank, secured by a mortgage that was properly recorded; however, the county recorder did not list the mortgage in its index for recorded documents. Brunson sold the property to Jesus and Celeste Ijalba and executed and delivered a deed for the property to them. This deed was properly recorded and indexed at the county recorder's office. Jesus and Celeste ljalba borrowed money from Chrysler First Financial Services Corporation, secured by a mortgage on the property that was properly recorded and indexed at the county recorder's office. Subsequently, Howard Savings Bank's mortgage from 2 years earlier was finally indexed by the county recorder. Three months later, Howard Savings Bank brought a foreclosure action on the property for Brunson's default on its loan and claimed that its mortgage had priority over the ljalbas's deed and Chrysler First Financial's mortgage. The ljalbases and Chrysler First Financial argiued that Howard Savings Bank's mortgage did not have priority because it was not indexed, and therefore when they conducted their title search, Howard Savingss Bank's mortgaage did not appear in the index. The ljalbases and Chrysler First Financial filed motions for summary judgment. Was Howard Savings Bank's mortgage on the property properly recorded and indexed and thus gave notice of its existence to subsequent parties? The Hotoard Savings Critical Legal Thinking Cases 49.1 Americans with Disabilities Act have the same sight line to the screen as non-wheelTitle III of the Americans with Disabilities chair-using patrons. The United States sued Cinemark, Act (ADA) requires that public accommodations must alleging that the seating arrangement in Cinemark stabe "readily accessible to and usable by individuals with dium-style theaters violated Standard 4.33.3 and Title disabilities." The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is III of the ADA. Does Cinemark's wheelchair seating empowered to adopt regulations to enforce the ADA. arrangement in its stadium-style theaters violate StanThe DOJ adopted Standard 4.33.3 for movie theaters, dard 4.33.3 and Title III of the ADA? United States of which provides, America v. Cinemark USA, Inc., 348 F.3d 569,2003 Wheclchair areas shall be an integral part of for the Sixth Circuit, 2003) any fixed seating plan and shall be provided so as to provide people with physical disabilities a choice of admission prices and lines of sight comparable to those for members of the general public. They shall adjoin an accessible route that also serves as a means of egress in case of emergency. At least one companion fixed seat shall be provided next to each wheelchair seating area. When the seating capacity exceeds 300, wheelchair spaces shall be provided in more than one location. Readily removable seats may be installed in wheelchair spaces when the spaces are not required to accommodate wheelchair users. Cinemark USA, Ine, owns and operates movie theaters throughout the United States. Cinemark has constructed stadium-style movie theaters with a stadium-style senting configuration, that is, rows of seats rising at a relatively steep grade to provide better sight lines for movie patrons. The stadium-style seating is inaccessible for wheelchair-using patrons. For wheelchair-using patrons, the theaters provide a flat area in front of the screen where these patrons do not