ALONG versus ON.
When writing a typical metes and bounds course in a legal description, which is the better word to use to control a bearing, the word ALONG or the word ON? "...thence bearing North 90 degrees East along said line..." or "...thence bearing North 90 degrees East on said line..."
Before you jump to an answer, consider the following.
When I first started writing legal descriptions, I used ON rather than ALONG. Then, trying to accept professional input, I was told that ALONG is the better word. So, in an attempt to better myself, I switched to using ALONG in place of ON. Lately, however, I am considering switching back.
I saw that there was previous discussion comparing ALONG with the word WITH.
https://surveyorconnect.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=223460
This is not that discussion. I agree, WITH is not the word that I want to use. Using the word ON was not a part of that previous discussion. I am considering that maybe ALONG is not the word I want to use either.
Wattles prefers ALONG. I have a copy of Land Survey Descriptions, 10th edition C.1974, by Wattles (with green ink). In Section 900, on page 95, Wattles compares the use of BY, ON, WITH and ALONG. Wattles states that ON is an old form for ALONG and not as satisfactory; better to use "along a line," rather than "by a line" or "on a line" or "with a line."
Throughout "Advanced Land Descriptions" by Cuomo and Minnick, another textbook on creating land descriptions, the word ALONG is used extensively to cite the bounding lines that control the bearings. The word ON is never used in that sense.
In Writing Legal Descriptions (with purple ink), Wattles discusses ALONG on pages 3.7 and 3.8 (pages 7 and 8 of Section 3) and even recites a court case, but the focus in the court case is the riparian shore. To go ALONG a non-tide water stream presumptively carries title as far into the stream as the grantor possesses. Yes, the riparian rights make sense to me, but that doesn't convince me why ALONG is just an all-around better word making ON an older form.
What does it mean if I tell my crew to walk along the fence? What does it mean if I tell my crew to walk on the fence? I picture two different scenarios; my crew is not used to walking on a tight-rope. I can row a boat along the shore/along the bank/along the water's edge and it doesn't mean that I have to follow the thread of the river. Can I row a boat along the river? Sure. Can I row a boat on the river? Sure. Can I row a boat along the bank? Yes, I'll be in the water though and near the bank. Can I row a boat on the bank? Isn't that where you put the boat to keep it from floating away, ON the bank? So if I want to travel along/on/over/under/across a particular line and in a direction defined by the measurement of North 90 degrees East, I think it is better to say that my course will go from one end of the line to the other end by going ON that line rather than ALONG that line. As I travel ON that line, we can travel together as you travel ALONG that line beside me.
For the moment, I am still writing "thence North 90 degrees East along that line." Why? Because that's how I was told to do it, and I have habitually doing it that way for so many years that it sounds correct in my head. I see that so many others also do so. Perhaps it is time to break away from the wandering heard and follow the path laid out in front of me.
Use ALONG instead of ON...but WHY? I question myself. I would appreciate discussion. What say you?
I think I'll go ALONG with you ON this!
🙂
Cold nuff fer ya?
N
I use
"designated by the letter B; thence N 90 degrees East along said right of way line a distance of 150' to a set 3/4" iron pipe designated by the letter"C".
I use "coincident with"
ALONG vs ON, It Is Called Metes And Bounds
You go ON a bearing of N 89° E (mete) ALONG Lot 2 (bound).
Coincident means exactly the same and almost nothing in surveying is ever exactly the same. ALONG implies on my bearing or the adjoiner's bearing whichever is right and/or has greater authority. It is a Wiggle Word.
Paul in PA
To me ON refers to a point, ALONG to a line. Verb v. adverb? Don't remember all the grammatic rules but along just sounds better to me. "Coincident with" sounds okay as well, but requires more typing. If charging by the word, use them all:)
If you don't like "along", how about "following"? Also, shouldn't your "on", "along", or "following" precede the course data, as in "thence along said line, northerly 150' more or less, to..."?
Great question and you are going to get soooo many different replies. My point is go with what you feel comfortable with and can stand behind. If it goes to court, let the lawyers hash it out. Because you know they will.
> To me ON refers to a point, ALONG to a line. Verb v. adverb? Don't remember all the grammatic rules but along just sounds better to me. "Coincident with" sounds okay as well, but requires more typing. If charging by the word, use them all:)
I agree with you ON is something you can occupy or stand on. If you say ON the fence line, you know someone is going to claim that you own the top of the fence, and I can buy everything under the top of the fence.
Doesn't anyone use a dictionary anymore? When I considered this decades ago, I looked up "along". In the immediate proxcimetry thereto, does not cross.
If that fits your circumstance, use it. If I want the fence as the boundary, it must be ON the fence, along won't do. The words simply are not interchangable. I have yet to see a court put a special meaning on these words for surveying purposes.
I've never used on. I use with, when I am "with" a line and "along" when I am along a stream or lake. Wattles was clear when one should be used over the other.
I've never seen a description with "on" being the qualifier of the parent or adjoining line.
...thence S00E 123 ft TO the N R/W line of XYZ; thence N90E 123 ft ALONG SAID R/W line... bla bla bla. Even calling off the fact you went TO said line is almost redundant because you cannot go ALONG said line unless you get TO it.
I don't think ON is applicable or appropriate. You sit ON a chair. You walk ALONG a line to get TO said chair.
But that's just me. Clarification via map form is always good too, but that should be SOP.
THENCE NxxxW so many feet to a point, said point being a corner common with John Doe, DBxPG, THENCE with the common line of John Doe, NxxxW so many feet to a point...
Can also be used to describe .... to a point in the north line of the R/W of Interstate 65, THENCE with the northern R/W of Interstate 65, NxxxE....
Never do the words ALONG or ON show up.
Obviously, there are many other descriptor that show up on property descriptions. NEVER call them legal descriptions, that implies other incorrect identifications.
Good point. However, when "along" pertains to following a well defined existing boundary (not a new one), there is no other reasonable interpretation than one that places the described line as coincident with the existing boundary. Also, have you never driven "along" a road?
>
> If that fits your circumstance, use it. If I want the fence as the boundary, it must be ON the fence, along won't do. The words simply are not interchangable. I have yet to see a court put a special meaning on these words for surveying purposes.
Church V. Meeker, 34 Conn. 421 did
Reminiscent of a certain Arkysawyer
Some of you fine fellers need to take a shot at running for elected office.
As stated to the Grand Jury: "It depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is. If the--if he--if 'is' means is and never has been, that is not--that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement....Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with **. ********, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true."
"NEVER call them legal descriptions, that implies other incorrect identifications."
:good: :good:
Reminiscent of a certain Arkysawyer
I have never used "ON". As others have said, "ON" connotes a point on a line. However, I would use "IN" in that case. I only use "ALONG" when (see Black's Law dictionary) I am sometimes touching a boundary, or thread of a stream, etc., but am not coincident with it. If I am sure that I am coincident with a boundary line, R.O.W. line, etc., I usually use "WITH" or "COINCIDENT WITH". This means that I am touching this line at all times to its' terminus.
You must know if you are coincident with a line or not. If you're not, use "along". I certainly wouldn't use "WITH" when describing a fence that may touch my boundary line at different intervals, unless that was the express intent of my client or previous record of that line.
Please consult Black's Law dictionary, it is your friend. Say what you mean, mean what you say, whether you're going "along" the line, or "with" it.
Per various court opinions "Along" can have several meanings.
Along - "Lengthwise of, implying motion or at or near, distinguished from across."
"By, on, up to, or over, according to the subject matter and context."
"The term does not necessarily mean touching at all points." "Nor does it necessarily imply contact.".
Context probably has a lot to do with how the term is interpreted.
On - "Upon; as soon as; near to; along; along side of; adjacent to; contiguous to; at the time of; following upon; in; during; at or in contact with the upper surface of a thing."
That is taken form a legal dictionary.
Reminiscent of a certain Arkysawyer
Speaking of candidates for our mostest sacred of all positions, I'm putting my hat ON the ring for the beloved bovine from Kansas. I'm working on my contribution check now, but where is my gosh dang pen.
The current herd in the mix certainly cannot ever undo the master of language illusions. And we thought legalese was confusing, now we have clintonese.
However with some secretly fermented bovine prairie dust, a few clicks of the ruby slippers, and the next thing you know... we'll be ALONG the line TO Kansas. Almost like the real world... 😉
Mr Cow for Prez 2016.
Cheers 'leggers.