Leon,
Excellent narrative about the operation of State law regarding real property rights once title has vested in private hands.
The rub is in whether adjacent land was unpatented, and whether the required elements are met at all abutters' common boundaries and common control points. This is what leads to the equivalent of fractional lots in the current cadastre due to differing retracement methods based upon unauthentic POBs, and the use of the aliquot means of disposal by description.
Where Keith when you need him?
Warren Smith, post: 398534, member: 9900 wrote: Leon,
Excellent narrative about the operation of State law regarding real property rights once title has vested in private hands.
The rub is in whether adjacent land was unpatented, and whether the required elements are met at all abutters' common boundaries and common control points. This is what leads to the equivalent of fractional lots in the current cadastre due to differing retracement methods based upon unauthentic POBs, and the use of the aliquot means of disposal by description.
Where Keith when you need him?
Yeah, if it's a fed boundary (unpatented land) acquiescence doesn't apply and don't get to concerned about a fence. If your clients cabin is over the line inside a very old fence, big problem.
LRDay, post: 398529, member: 571 wrote: Surveyors don't transfer title, title people don't transfer title, lawyers and/or courts don't transfer title.
Landowners do, by their actions written and unwritten.I agree that surveyors don't transfer title. I've never read a case that said they did.
Landowners actions do establish boundaries.
So, say in Utah, 1995, a landowner hires a surveyor to survey his 40 acres, a å? of a å? of a section. Landowner shops around and gets the lowest bid. Low bid surveyor finds what he thinks is a section corner maybe a real one. Surveyor goes NES&W 1320 feet, marks the corners, collects his 2 bits and moves on to the next victim. Did the surveyor find the boundaries, probably not.
BUT, the landowner takes action and before the end of 1995 has constructed fences according to the survey and builds a new home on the property (occupies the parcel). His neighbors don't really care, they got a free survey of their boundaries and a spanking new fence also for free to keep their livestock under control. Things just exist in this state until 2016 (21 years), total peace in the neighborhood.
In 2016 one of the neighbors considering selling for big bucks to rich New Yorker, pays just value for a survey. 2016 surveyor roots out all the required original section corners to define the å? of a å? section. Fences don't fit (no surprise). Under Utah laws the 1995 survey and resultant fences with the actions of the landowners over the 21 year period meet the requirements for boundary by acquiescence and the ÛÏtitle has transferred.Û
So the 1995 surveyor didn't transfer any title but he did set up the events for the landowners by using his 2 bit survey to establish the boundaries of the property (not according to a proper section breakdown).
If a legit survey was done before 2015 (less than 20 years after the fence construction) a landowner could fix the problem, claim his original title location for the property. Good reason to get a proper survey I'd say and don't let it go for more than 20 years, at least in Utah.
Leon, thanks for posting the case, i enjoyed reading it, i knew you understand landowners
significance in creating title, im on my phone so my posts are truncated.
This is an interesting Colorado case. The Court held that the otherwise acquiesced boundary was extinguished by 15 days of common ownership in 1977.
The dissenting opinion is interesting too; it cites the landmark California case, Young v. Blakeman which was written in 1908 by Justice Shaw who I consider to be our Justice Cooley.
