Where is the line?

The southern line of the wall.

Southerly side of the wall. You can't sell what you don't own.

You Can't Sell..........

....something you don't own.

The 1948 deed description is defective.

Around here, it's the southerly side of the wall

"Any discussion of subsequent deeds is irrelevant. In the absence of facts giving rise to an estoppel, we decline to establish a rule of law that binds successors to real property to all descriptions of property made by their predecessors in prior deeds, particularly where the original patent contradicts such deeds. Moreover, one purporting to be an adjoining land-owner should not be allowed to capitalize on such mistakes where the boundaries are correctly established by even earlier deeds"

SKI ROUNDTOP, INC. v. Mary E. WAGERMAN, et al.
Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
79 Md. App. 357; 556 A.2d 1144; 1989 Md.

> Where is the line; the centerline of the wall or southerly side of the wall?

I would look at the deed prior to the 1944 agreement. Chances are that the 1948 deed mirrors the prior deed. It is common (expected) that a boundary agreement will not change the current or subsequent deed descriptions. The parties likely agreed that the southerly line was the boundary for the purpose of clarifying who owned and, therefore, was responsible to maintain the wall. The clarification by agreement would be binding upon the subsequent purchasers as establishing the boundary. The 1948 deed can't violate the agreement without a new agreement by both parties.

I'd tend to believe that the 1944 agreement stands, but would like to see more evidence from the prior and subsequent deeds of both parcels.

JBS

I agree with J B Stahl, but have more questions.

How does the wall agree with the prior deeds?

Did the 1944 agreement tie the South side of the wall to other monuments?

It may be shown that the 1948 deed was a recasting of the prior deeds when in fact the 1944 agreement changed the prior dimensions.

Or the 1944 agreement could have set the South side of the wall as the singular monument.

Or the 1948 sale could have yielded half the wall to the adjacent parcel.

It also depends on how the subsequent parties reacted with the wall.

It may be necessary to recast the 1944 agreement.

Not as easy an answer as you thought, says I?

Paul in PA

First - sorry to have put this in the wrong category. I was not paying attention to the category, merely worrying about the content and spelling of the post.

"You cannot sell what you don't own" would apply if the southerly parcel was trying to sell to the centerline. The southerly owner has given up any rights to the wall per the 1944 agreement.

To answer other questions, there is no earlier deed to clarify things, hence the need for the 1944 agreement. Deeds before 1944 are vague. The agreement provides dimensions along the line, but they do not tie to other lines. Not much help there. And, the old monument, literaly a marble monument, was dug out.

I think the answer is that the owner of the north parcel sells to the centerline of the wall in 1948, calling to the southerly adjoiner. The southerly adjoiner has agreed to the south side of the wall. The call for the adjoiner trumps the call to the centerline of the wall.

Or, the northerly owner has transferrred the site, but left a strip between the centerline and the southerly side of the wall for his heirs to deal with.

Nah.

KS

Unlikely that a gap was intended. The trouble with agreements is the chain of title, unless they are recorded as an addendum to a re-recording of the adjusted lands deeds, they often get lost, especially by someone not looking for them as I expect is the case here. Don't make 3 tracts where the intent is for two.
jud

1944 rules in my opinion.

The line is the center of the wall that existed in 1948 and the southerly side of the wall that existed in 1944, and there is no gap. Clearly the parties moved the wall onto the line where all walls belong. There is no other way to explain deed language calling for the center of the wall by the same party that signed the agreement 4 years earlier.

Duane, my experience with home owners is that they depend on others to catch these things. They just sign where the x is located. Probably what happened in 1948.
jud

>... the parties moved the wall onto the line where all walls belong.

Sounds more like the parties moved the line onto the wall. Much more easier than moving a wall onto a line.

Would not the agreement still hold, it is what settled the ownership line 1944. I saw no mention of legal action taken to terminate the Agreement that was made in 1944. It is still in effect and it is unlikely that a strip being half of the width of the wall was ever intended to be created. I think a court would look upon the 1948 deed as being defective and hold the Southerly line. The reason to check new deeds with the old is to find defects in the writings after the original was written.
jud

Jud, I would agree in general. But here, they did not use a vague earlier deed, and they did not use the agreement description from four years ago. How would someone not familiar with the property even know there was a wall? And, if the wall was enough of an issue four years previous to generate a recorded agreement, then the grantor would certainly notice wording that differed.

I'm just playing devils advocate. There seems to be something missing because it does not make sense. I would be very hesitant to go with an agreement that may or may not be binding for many differing reasons over a deed call location.

Seems like one of those situations where some hon-yock will pop up a year after the survey and produce evidence of why the center of the wall is the true location. Some odd yet compelling story, backed up by solid evidence, that disproves the whole line of reasoning behind the survey decision.

Whoa Duane, A Boundary Line Agreement Changes 2 Deeds.

You cannot change that agreement by only changing one deed.

After a term of years, other laws may in fact change the agreement, but estoppel would not be one of them.

Paul in PA

Whoa Duane, A Boundary Line Agreement Changes 2 Deeds.

I've seen quite a number of deeds that were corrected later because the person typing up the deed used the same description as when the current owner purchased it. The problem being that one or more small parcels had been sold off from that tract since first purchase.

The description on the deed does not control the property line for surveyors; attorney's and judges are not qualified to recover and analyze physical evidence.

Physical evidence accepted by the owner(s), or not objected to by an affected owner after the time period specified in statutes of repose or limitation is the controlling element in a retracement survey, not the terms of the description.

The 1944 recorded agreement specified the location of the line as the face of the wall and that is the legal boundary line.

The only thing necessary is to correct the inaccurate record description so that some jerk deed staker won't 'create' a bogus dispute because he can't adequately interpret recovered physical evidence of 'a parcel created by the parties as opposed to that created by law'. Remember Black's definition?
Alienation
In real property law, the transfer of the property and possession of lands, tenaments, or other things, from one person to another. The term is particularly applied to absolute conveyances of real property. The voluntary and complete transfer from one person to another. Disposition by will. Every mode of passing realty by the act of the party, as distinguished from passing it by the operation of law.See also Restraint on alienation.

Restraint on Alienation
A provision in an instrument of conveyance which prohibits the grantee from selling or transfering the property which is the subject of the conveyance. Most such restraints are unenforceable as against public policy and the law's policy of free alienability of land. See restrictive covenant.

What are your rights as a private land owner in your state? If you don't know that, how can you effectively provide a service that is supposed to help private citizens protect those rights?

Richard Schaut

Whoa Duane, A Boundary Line Agreement Changes 2 Deeds.

Paul,

An invalid or void agreement changes nothing. If there was not a legitimate confusion as to location of the true line, then the agreement is void. Several other ways it might be void.