O.S.1991 53(A)(7) controls over 16 O.S.1991 20 when the 53(A)(7) presumption was undisputed. Title 16 O.S. 1991 20 provides: Power of Attorney-Execution-Recording: a power of attorney-in-fact for the conveyance of real estate or any interest therein, or for the execution or release of any mortgage therefor, shall be executed, acknowledged and recorded in the manner required by this chapter for the execution, acknowledgment and recording of deeds and mortgages, and shall be recorded in the county where the land is situated, and no deed, mortgage or release of a mortgage executed by an attorney-in-fact shall be received for record or recorded until the power under which the same is executed has been duly filed for record in the same office; and the recording of any deed, mortgage or release of mortgage shall be of no effect for any purpose until the power under which it is executed has been duly filed for record in the same office. Section 53(A)(7) provides: 53 Recorded signed documents-Rebuttable presumptions A. a recorded signed document relating to title to real estate creates a rebuttable presumption with respect to the title that: 7. a person purporting to act as: a. one of the officers listed in Section 93 of Title 16 of the Oklahoma Statutes on behalf of a corporation attorney-in-fact, president, vice-president, chairman or vice-chairman of the board of directors, b. a partner of a general partnership, c. a general partner of a limited partnership, d. a manager of a limited liability company, e. a trustee of a trust, f. any officer or member of the board of trustees of a religious corporation, g. a court-appointed trustee, receiver, personal representative, guardian, conservator, or other fiduciary, orh. an officer or member of any other entity, held the position he purported to hold, acted within the scope of his authority (unless limitations of authority were previously filed of record and indexed against the property in question), and the authorization satisfied all requirements of law; Section 20 and 53(A)(7) may be read in pari materia. We therefore construe them together with other statutes on the same subject as part of a coherent system. Oklahoma City Urban Renewal Auth. v. Medical Technology and Research Authority of Oklahoma, 2000 OK 23, 4 P.3d 677, 694, Summers, J., dissenting, citing Cowart v. Piper Aircraft Corp., 1983 OK 66, P4, 665 P.2d 315, 317. Satisfaction of the requirements of 53(A)(7) gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of a properly recorded instrument. However, failure to comply with the requirement of 20 effectively rebuts the presumption because 20 provides that, without filing a power of attorney document, the release shall not be effective. Accordingly, reading these two statutory provisions together, an instrument signed by one of the persons listed in 53(A)(7) is presumed to be properly recordable, but that presumption was rebutted by the failure to comply with 20, which resulted in the Satisfaction of Mortgage not being effective.