Looking for a MI court case

Need a bit more to go by. Nothing comes up in a search of "Baldwin and section and boundary." What is the case about?

Been poking around... could it be "Greenview Associates, LLC v. Pettis, No. 279109 (Mich.App. 03/10/2009)"

JBS

Thanks, John,

That wasn't it, but it leads to lots of interesting stuff. I was starting to get lost running down that rabbit hole!

I'll describe the case the best I can remember.

The 1/4 corner in dispute had been in place for several decades. It was not known who placed it or how it was done, but had been accepted by 10 or 12 other surveyors over the intervening years. Then in the late 90s/early 2000s, an expert measurer came along, declared the long standing iron wrong, the original corner lost, proportioned in a new one and staked his client's deed accordingly, sending the area into chaos, confusion, and tumult.

In the opinion, the judge writing it had some rather harsh things to say about that surveyor.

I don't recall just when the case was, but I want to say it was published in the late 90s or sometime prior to 2007.

I wish I had more to go on.

I'm working on two Sections (separated by hundreds of miles) that have quarter corner funny business going on.

One involves the south quarter (57') and the other involves the north quarter (900').

The latter was resolved by a lawsuit in 1972 in favor of a version of the corner which is most likely not the original but is more in the center of the north line. The likely original corner is 900' west. This is in Section 7 and it was surveyed piecemeal in the 1860s and 1870s; I think they had too many surveyors involved and the last one messed up the north quarter. The appellate case People vs. Thompson (California) reversed the first Superior Court decision but the second Superior Court Jury trial found for the more centered quarter corner based on different reasoning. The Jury apparently did not believe that the 900' west "original" was the original monument and the State gave up at that point and settled to keep the amount of damages down. We are blazing the line in accordance with the settlement and the probable original corner is just an artifact not being used.

Sounds pretty screwy, Dave. At least with a specific decision, you no longer need to settle the question.

What I'm looking for is a case that defines the issue of Common Report fairly well. As I recall, the case that I can't remember well enough to find addressed that.

Sounds like you might be talking about "Adams v. Hoover, 493 NW 2d 280 - Mich: Court of Appeals 1992"

The Judge talks about the "technically correct but maverick Cole survey."

JBS

John

can you find one where they reversed?

I'm curious how they handled it. It seems like in other States the Appellate Courts will actually direct a verdict and get the case finished instead of just sending it back down the line for another try at it but maybe I'm mis-remembering on that point.

The California Appellate Courts may reverse but all that does is reset it for a new trial or some lower Court action.