If a PLO withdrawal is issued over and across a prior withdrawal and is expressly made subject to the earlier withdrawal does that mean the second withdrawal is defeated by the first across those lands contained within the first? Is there a layered interest with one being subject to the other? Can anyone point to any court cases or opinions that can shed light on these types of issues?
What's a PLO?
Never heard of it. And what state are you concerned about?
What's a PLO?> Dave, you a funny guy
LOL Dave, you're kidding right? Public Land Office? And I would say that logic would hold that the second withdrawal is subservient to the prior for those common lands.
Dtp
Well Foggi .....
I guess that shows why CFEDs is worthwhile even for a M&B guy. It truly didn't register with me - and that's assuming you have the acronym interpretation correct.
Well Foggi .....
that's true, assuming that I have it right 🙂
I thought you were just being a Colonial smart aleck ! LOL
Merry Christmas to you and yours..
Dtp
Well Foggi .....
Hey, I'm in PLSSia and didn't recognize those letters for that reason, so don't feel bad.
I thought he was trying to slip thru some discussion involving the Middle East.;-)
Well Foggi .....>I'll correct mysewlf
PLO = Public Land Order, at least per the BLM site.
Well Foggi .....
Me too, I thought it was Palestine Liberation Organization….duh :'(
Well Foggi .....
ditto here...didn't know PLO and immediately thought of the Palestinian Liberation Organization as well.
Doing a google-search I see that there was a 'Public Land Office' established in Florida. Anyway you might get more specific in the question.
You Cannot Sell What You Do Not Own
This is a simple Senior/Junior rights transaction.
The Grantor (PLO) is uncertain of what/where it previously granted so it says you get what we didn't grant before.
Should have asked a Colonial Surveyor.
Paul in nonPLS PA
List of Public Land Orders
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/content/wo/en/prog/more/lands/public_land_orders.html