Don't forget, Robert, that I agree that the statute as written probably makes a mechanic's lien for us a long shot, but let me play devil's advocate for a minute.  Say I performed a search on a parcel of land.  My client was an attorney who was working for the purchaser.  After the closing, I am sent a deed and a construction loan to record--active information that an "improvement" is being made.  Say also that I find on record the building permit for the structure.  Then say, I don't get paid.  After six months, while preparing my small claims case, I find that a second closing to a permanent mortgage has occured and is recorded, meaning that the "improvement" has completed.  I pull a copy of the property card and the property has been reassessed to show the improvement.  Therefore, even though many loans and refi's are NOT for improvement, this search clearly was for the purpose of clearing title to land for building a structure on it. 

In my opinion, as your Ohio law is written, a good argument could be made that my services, just as the surveyor who partitioned the property, were in "futherance of an improvement".  Many states include surveying and appraisals as services for which a mechanic's lien can be recorded.  Neither of these services are any more "upon" the property to increase the value of the property than mine.

I would submit that the only thing that could possibly make the trial ballon of an argument better is if a power of attorney was recorded with the first recording and the attorney that was my client was the attorney-in-fact for HIS client at the closing.