I am trying to write an aliquot description for the general description of my metes and bounds field notes (Texas field notes = legal description).
Farmer Leibnitzer bought a 360 acre rock farm by aliquot description being the west half and the west half of the west half of the northeast quarter.
He sold 40 acres being the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter.
I don't normally write aliquot descriptions, but because his original deed was so described, I'd like to keep it in the description chain.
I'm thinking to say that it is the west half (W/2) of the west half (W/2) of the northeast quarter and the west half (w/2) of Section 17, save and except the southeast quarter (SE/4) of the southwest quarter (SW/2). Is that adequate or would you break the west half down into smaller aliquot parts?
I would preserve the original and add 'excepting therefrom'...
I'd go with
...the west half and the west half of the west half of the northeast quarter EXCEPTING THEREFROM the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter...
The west half of the west half of the northeast quarter and the west half of (as described in Book Page) except the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter (as described in Book Page) of Section 17, Township xx, Range yy, Meridian.
add references to prior deeds
omit (W/2) etc
Important question to be addressed:
Regarding the exception, did farmer Leibnitzer sell the southeast quarter of the southwest quarter or did he sell 40 acres???
He sold the quarter quarter section. The acreage was rounded off and included in my example for clarity. I am not including acreage in my actual description except at the end of my "being more particularly described by metes and bounds" portion of the field notes.
This is Texas, we don't have Meridians or Ranges and only sometimes do we have Townships. This is in the 16 mile reservation for the T&P Ry so it does have a Block and Township.
West half (W/2) of the west half (W/2) of the northeast quarter and the west half (w/2) of Section 17, less and except the southeast quarter (SE/4) of the southwest quarter (SW/2). is acceptable.
Save and except means the grantor is holding something back.
Since it is not in the grantors possession the words are "Less and Except" or "Excepting" the SE/4 of the SW/4 of Section 17.
I think it is clearer to break into parts:
NW/4 , NE/4 of SW/4, NW/4 of SW/4, SW/4 of SW/4, W/2 of SE/4 & W/2 of SE/2 of SE/4 of S17.
Paul in non PLSS PA
I just pulled the a new deed for the less and except tract and found a legal description for it that I forgot I did. I remember sending an electronic file to the client. For a half minute I thought someone wrote the legal from my drawing file until I looked up the project and found the plat. It was a pretty hectic here this time last year. But at least I can remember what I had for breakfast.
I would call it the W1/2 W1/2 NE1/4, the NW1/4, the W1/2 SW1/4 and the NE1/4 SW1/4 of Section 17. I hate when Less and excepts continue on through time. I think that's part of our job to get rid of additional language like that.
I was asked to do a survey for a 1/4 section, in the description there were 7 less and excepts, 5 parcels that were sold in the 80s, a rail road and state highway. The 5 parcels were all lengthy metes and bounds descriptions and both the rail road and state highway had curves in them and not parallel to each other. It took me a several hours just to figure out what was the remainder. The client was left with several parcels but of course the county said it was still one divided parcel, go figure. It all started when he found out he owned a triangle south of the rail road and had an offer for it. The survey was going to cost the bulk of what he was going to get for the parcel and the county was asking him to include the 5 excepted parcels in the survey even though he purchased it after the divisions took place.
I'm with bvhill. I detest the use of west half of a section or east half of a section. I prefer to tie everything to the quarter section level and work from there. Saw one the other day that read "The north 3/4 of the west 1/2 of Section such and such". That supposed 240 acres came into existence from portions of three patented tracts. First there was the west half of the northwest quarter and the northeast quarter of the northwest quarter. Next came the southeast quarter of the northwest quarter and the northeast quarter of the southwest quarter. Finally the northwest quarter of the southwest quarter was added.
The kicker is that the center of section in not on a straight line between the south quarter corner and north quarter corner by a very significant deviation. It also is not on a straight line between the west quarter corner and east quarter corner.
Holy Cow, post: 345384, member: 50 wrote: .. It also is not on a straight line between the west quarter corner and east quarter corner.
Of course it's not HC. We all know it's on a latitudinal arc. :pinch:
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
Except the T&P has no quarter corners or latitudinal arc, it's all "perfectly square" B-)
Yes, it's so flat out there that grid and surface match. Lol