I can't recall running into this before. I was hired to do an exhibit of lands for a medium sized ranch.
There was a failed attempted subdivision of part of the ranch 45 years ago. The subdivision was created but the roads and power lines were only somewhat installed. Some lots were sold but since they never were really developed they were left vacant and the owners walked away.?ÿ
They stopped paying taxes and eventually a couple of new owners got the lots in a tax sale. This went on for a few decades, some back and forth between the tax sale buyers and the new ranch owners. I was tasked to find the lots in the early days of GPS for the tax sale buyers and the ranch wasn't all that happy to have me out there but were friendly to me personally.?ÿ
Anyway I wondered what may have happened to the lots and the realtor wanting the exhibit said all that was resolved with the ranch now owning all lands. So I got the "deed" and it was an affidavit. The affidavit basically says the ranch owns all the old subdivision?ÿ
The affidavit references a Court judgement from the 1980's and declares all Sheriff's sales null and void basically. It's a 40 page document so I haven't read through all of it, but the title people "assure" me it's all good.?ÿ
Sounds like a plot line from 'Yellowstone'. Don't take any offers for a ride to the train station!
Seen "failed" subdivisions with later adjudication essentially become reversion to acreage without benefit of a recorded Reversion to Acreage Map.?ÿ If no one has bought and occupied it's cut and dried but if title transfers have occurred then it becomes a rat's nest.?ÿ I'd insist a Title company insure the entire parcel instead of "assuring" me?ÿ and I'd strictly survey based on that policy.?ÿ I'd also suggest a Reversion to?ÿ
Acreage Map be filed and charged for accordingly, if that's an option in your State.
@hi-staker never seen an episode- doubt I ever will- have some friends in the ??root who have been extras in a few...
Bomber dude!
?ÿ
Double down and go for it!
?ÿ
???? ???? ?????ÿ
I'd go take a look at the 1980's court judgement to see what it says.
I looked at it of course, basically it's 40 pages of resolution dealing with mortgages, disputes, for each and every parcel purchased during the short time the subdivision sold some lots.?ÿ
There is one 40 acre parcel remaining in the middle of the larger property not owned by the ranch.?ÿ
My task is to plot the boundary of the larger property showing the 40 acre parcel and the easement to it.?ÿ
I'm not doing a survey.
Just laying out the property lines over a photo for display.?ÿ
There is a state Supreme Court case dealing with almost this exact issue. A subdivision was created and lots sold, then the subdivision failed after a few lots were purchased. The original owners didn't pay taxes and the lots were picked up at a tax sale. Decades later a lot owner decided to build on his lot and had to build the non-existing road to the lot. The ranch sued for AP and won. The Supreme Court was very dismissive of the tax sale creating ownership of the lots.?ÿ
?ÿ
I looked at it of course, basically it's 40 pages of resolution dealing with mortgages, disputes, for each and every parcel purchased during the short time the subdivision sold some lots.?ÿ
There is one 40 acre parcel remaining in the middle of the larger property not owned by the ranch.?ÿ
My task is to plot the boundary of the larger property showing the 40 acre parcel and the easement to it.?ÿ
I'm not doing a survey.
Just laying out the property lines over a photo for display.?ÿ
There is a state Supreme Court case dealing with almost this exact issue. A subdivision was created and lots sold, then the subdivision failed after a few lots were purchased. The original owners didn't pay taxes and the lots were picked up at a tax sale. Decades later a lot owner decided to build on his lot and had to build the non-existing road to the lot. The ranch sued for AP and won. The Supreme Court was very dismissive of the tax sale creating ownership of the lots.?ÿ
?ÿ
sounds like fun... I don't do much field work these days, but these Exhibits are fun to prepare, if they are willing to pay and wait.
PS: I would include and reference that 1980's court judgement... my drawing, my rules
?ÿ
@rankin_file It's not a terrible show, but it's not really a good one either. It is kind of nice to catch the glimpses of real Montana that are few and far between (instead of Utah, where most of the filming took place). The do take WAAAAAY too many liberties with the Montana lifestyle though.