As the saying goes, I am not a lawyer, but, IMHO, the best way to read a deed or other legal document is to read it word for word, not adding anything, not assuming anything, not feeling a word might have been left out, anything other than what is written.?ÿ So in this case, I would be of the opinion that the person ordered to transfer title did not do so, and still holds title.?ÿ Now, if more information were to come to light, my opinion could change.?ÿ The title companies I have been working with lately have, for lack of a better term, not seemed to work very hard at running back a chain of title, often being surprised when we bring up a question of things like this.
ii) A division which may be created by any court of this state pursuant to the law of eminent domain, by operation of law or by order of any court in this state;
Check the state statutes, I've been involved in a couple. One the district court gave a landowner title to a road, another the court during a divorce split up lands from one tract to 4.
Far as I know the court decrees hold as title, but a lawyer would be needed in your state and for your situation.
I do know all the regulators and county attorney back off quickly when confronted by the court decree.
It's a cloud on the title, like a reservation. If you know it, it's in the public records, then refer to in your survey.
Not really looking for advice on this, but thanks.?ÿ This is just an abutter to the lot I'm surveying.?ÿ The description is consistent, and the boundary isn't in question to me.?ÿ
Was pretty much just trying to figure out what name to put on the plan, and I came across this and figured it was interesting enough to post.
