I don't have any connection to this case.?ÿ I do not have a clue as to who the two surveyors were and if I have ever met either one.?ÿ This is clear across the State from me.
But, being in the farm business myself, I recognize how misunderstandings can easily come about relative to land title and any kind of easement.?ÿ My grandfather arrived in my neighborhood 110 years ago. My grandmother's aunt and uncle and cousin had arrived a few years sooner than that.?ÿ They all passed information to my father, who passed it along to me.?ÿ There are so many examples of something similar to what is going on in the court battle mentioned earlier.
For example, I own the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter of a section.?ÿ However, the west fence line makes a bend to the northwest along a low berm separating a pond and then running over the pond dam out to the road fence.?ÿ When full, the pond supplies water to my cattle and my neighbor's cattle.?ÿ During drouth, both sides reduce to puddles.?ÿ The location of the dam was probably worked out between the adjacent owners many decades ago but never documented in the public records.?ÿ I am certain the pond was constructed using horse and slip methods.?ÿ Nearly all of the dirt used to build the dam would have had to have been hauled in as both farms have very little topsoil.?ÿ There is no other source of water beyond a well on my property.?ÿ There was no other pond on the adjoiner's land until about 1970.
If the dam were cut and a fence constructed along my true west boundary, almost none of the pond area would be left on my side.
What made sense to adjoining livestock producers possibly 100 years ago, makes sense today.?ÿ I would not pretend to claim adverse possession over to the location of the fence, although prior owners and I have had exclusive use of it for decades.
the court needed the surveys to determine whether an actual judicial dispute existed. In this case the location of the claimed line is granted by AP, so not necessary to decide which survey is correct.
What is "an actual judicial dispute"??ÿ
A dispute arises when two parties disagree and one party files suit against the other.
?ÿ
My experience is that Judges want a survey or they will not even entertain the case; rather simply dismiss it. But there is a trend toward eliminating surveyors from the picture across the midwest, which I hope doesn't spread.?ÿ
That's not how it works. If attorneys file suit and make it to (bench) trial without a survey, that's on them. An extremely unwise, but technically acceptable way to conduct litigation. The court/judge has to get business done no matter how sloppy the attorneys are. Which is why I made my initial comments about the rules of civil procedure and rules of evidence. If counsel is "irresponsible", a savvy and competent opposing counsel will capitalize on those mistakes. The outcomes usually look prejudice against the failing party, and may be the judges decision about motion for summary judgment by the savvy counsel.
?ÿ
But I don't see how a court could rule on AP if there is no evidence from a survey that the claimed line/area is being adversely possessed.?ÿ I think the claim depends on at least one survey opinion indicating a possession of an area not included in the claimants boundaries.
Adverse Possession does not arise because of a survey.
A survey (or any number of surveys) is just one (or more) piece(s) of evidence.
?ÿ
Prescription or AP is against the one possessing the right of occupancy (possessor piece of title rights).?ÿ If AP granted to a tenant, the deed holder may eventually get the land back.
Adverse Posession occurs against the title holder.
Question: What good would a successful adverse possesion claim against the tenants renting (occupying) your home do?
Answer: None. The tenants don't have the right to title, so they can't lose it.
Accuracy and precision are paramount when interpreting and evaluating court cases.
?ÿ
I don't like the necessity argument.?ÿ Why not make him build a bridge?
Is it more reasonable to force Pyle to build a bridge, or is it more reasonable to grant an easement for use like has been the case for the last XX years, which was enough to satisfy an adverse possession claim?
@norm I say yes, it is crucial to the outcome of the case. In fact I think it the only reason surveyors still exist.?ÿ
I understand your point.?ÿ But sometimes a second opinion really is valuable (even before court).?ÿ I have clients that will back me up on this.
But I would not "send" people to court.?ÿ Always encourage some sort of agreement.
@michigan-left I love your arguments. Well played. I presume you are well educated in this area but maybe not a bunch of experience in court.?ÿ No matter, I like it.?ÿ I won't respond to all the individual things, too much like cross exam and I'm not getting paid:)
I do not agree that a boundary should be depicted until there is a settlement either by the owners or the court.?ÿ
Eh.?ÿ Then why do any boundary survey, ever?
Even though a court might toss out the conclusion the surveyor came to I think you have to consider how many lawsuits are avoided when a pair of beefing neighbors accept a surveyor's findings.
?ÿ
Eh.?ÿ Then why do any boundary survey, ever?
Even though a court might toss out the conclusion the surveyor came to I think you have to consider how many lawsuits are avoided when a pair of beefing neighbors accept a surveyor's findings.
?ÿ
?ÿ
One of the first seminars I went to was based primarily on that.?ÿ
?ÿ
I think you have to consider how many lawsuits are avoided when a pair of beefing neighbors accept a surveyor's findings.
Absolutely. Isn't that the point??ÿ
"Appellate courts review the underlying facts in a light most favorable to the prevailing party without reweighing the evidence or making credibility assessments."
This is a typical statement when the lower court ruling is based upon a summary judgment.?ÿ The SJ presumes that the facts are agreed to by the parties negating the need for a trial.?ÿ The lower court skips the trial and proceeds directly to ruling on the facts in light of the law.?ÿ The appellate court ruling has no way to "reweigh the evidence" as no evidence was presented to the trial court.
JBS
My experience has been if the neighbors are disputing the boundary it is best to not finalize it until they either settle or a Judge rules in the case then monument the boundary and file the survey accordingly.
I think you have to consider how many lawsuits are avoided when a pair of beefing neighbors accept a surveyor's findings.
Absolutely. Isn't that the point?
That's a point, sure.