Here's the situation, generally speaking. Client and son adjoin each other harmoniously through separate deeds. At some point, happy family creates subdivision, showing deed lines and creating lots, easements, etc. Later on, still happy family shifts lot lines through additional plat. Now son is divorcing and she is getting what was theirs. Father is not happy, and he wants what he owns by deed, not by what additional plat defines it as. Does his participation in re-platting trump what he owns by deed? No later recordations exist defining ownership via plat aside from the recorded plats themselves. Owner is adamant that his deeded land is his. Anyone care to weigh in?
If he signed the plat, and I'm betting he did, then there are new lot lines. He can't plead ignorance from just falling off the turnip truck.
If I am reading this correctly, there was a subdivision plat made up but never acted upon. Also, there appears to have been no cross-deeding to make both father and son mutual owners of the entirety of the platted area. If this is correct, then he has no claim to the area soon to be owned by the soon to be ex-daughter-in-law and, likewise, she has no claim to what he has owned all along.
How in the world do people get away with doing such crazy stuff?
Ummmm, I'm not quite so certain about that.
Developers around here do subdivision plats all the time without giving up ownership of the newly created lots. The only thing the subdivision seems to do is re-define parcel boundaries for the purposes of conveyance, but until that conveyance actually happens by deed, they still retain the ownership rights to the entire platted land, except, of course, for dedications to the public or for public utility use.
There are two things in play here that few Surveyors would (or should) wade into. I learned a very painful lesson on both.
Community property laws vary by State. Even those with clear Statutes have long and winding roads of case law. The other consideration is rules of evidence. Again, deceptively complex in many jurisdictions.
My point is simple. I wouldn't attempt to help him by answering Title and Survey questions. He needs a good family law attorney. If he's in Boise I can pass on a few names to avoid...
Thanks for the insights. My gut tells me that he may still own the dirt even though he agreed to shift the lot lines. We'll let the lawyers take it from here...
A subdivision plat and approval doesn't change the underlying ownership other than what is expressed on the plat like dedications of land to the public or easements granted by the plat. I suppose a plat could have conveyance language but I've never seen any. The subdivision sets up the system to deed lots by a sub plat description (Lot 1 of Sub........).
So I'd by looking for deeds for the lots in the subdivision from the original underlying ownership (subdividers) to owners of the new lots (even from the original owners to themselves if they actually wanted to create the lots before they sold them to some other party.
As land surveyors, determination of ownership is outside the scope of our profession.
Personally, if I were asked to locate the boundaries (with making no determination of ownership), I would pull a title report and stake however the title calls out the boundaries. If the client disagrees with that, and there is no problems in the chain of title, then it would become the realm of the courts to determine who owns what.
"I suppose a plat could have conveyance language but I've never seen any. "
No specific conveyance language except "Owner of Lot 1, Signature. Owner of Lot 2, Signature."
It would be interesting in looking at the tax info. If FIL & Soon -to-be XDIL are paying taxes based on the recorded plat.... acquiescence? occupancy? yep- it's all clear as mud....
Huh, round these parts a redivision or modified subdivision is not effective until the first conveyance. Even then, it is only affects the property conveyed.
There was an attorney on the Planning Board at one point. He got so hopping mad about one project that we subdivided, modified, divided (there is a difference here) and then the owner sold the whole thing as one parcel. He asked if we could put some words on some plan stating this was final or this was the actual plan. I told him it was up to the owner's attorney to record such a document that brought that plan from approved to effective.
Owner signatures aren't required around here when dividing land, except on the application to the planning board.
Regardless, the plat only provides a mechanism for transfer of ownership, and doesn't actually transfer title.
Typically the owners signature on the plat is simply offering their approval of the plat, not the transfer of title.
When I worked down south owners signatures were required but only to show knowledge of the plan. There were several properties that had multiple plans on record with differing divisions shown. Potentially a confusing mess.
But, as I understand it, the plat does not do anything except portray a potential division of title.
Dtp
They need to ask themselves three questions:
-How much is the disputed land worth?
-How much is the satisfaction of winning worth?
-How much will the litigation cost?