Smith grants an easement to DOT 1950. Roads get built Smith keeps a presence in the area until the 1980's when his son and family moves. Before the 1980s Smith grants a parcel to Johnson northerly of the ROW to the new ROW which is monumented with large DOT concrete and brass monuments. Then Grants a parcel to Jones southerly of the ROW, in each case calling out the ROW.?ÿ
DOT tires of owning the easement and grants it to the locals. In 2010 the local commission decides to reduce the width of the ROW and vacates. Now who owns the triangle? Is it Jones or the Smith heirs who are still around.?ÿ
?ÿ
I don't have much of a dog in this since I'm not doing a survey for any of the landowners, but it's near the survey I'm doing and gets me interested.?ÿ
This answer will vary by State, but around here Jones gets the triangle. Johnson called for property outside of the right-of-way but made no express reservation to himself. Absent demonstrated use to a retsined parcel, Johnson is out. The property attaches to the lands from which it was taken, with a rebuttable presumption that the center line controls.
Interesting
I'm just starting a job now where I'm trying to convince the grantor to grant to the centerline of the highway a parcel he wants to sell west of the highway. He will retain the parcel east of the highway. It's a significant amount of land, but it's not worth much now, if it's ever vacated it would be. Imagine vacating a strip along the west ROW like the above example, then you have the owner east of the highway getting the strip.
I would suggest Smith's heirs if they owned the fee interest and the ROW was only an easement. Smith never conveyed his fee interest in the land that was a ROW easement.
That's certainly a valid argument, it would take a QT action to clean it up.
I’m in favor of Jones gets the triangle. Generally a call to the easement is a call to the centerline unless there is very specific language to the contrary.
But a QCD from Smith would be advisable, not absolutely required though.
I'm just starting a job now where I'm trying to convince the grantor to grant to the centerline of the highway a parcel he wants to sell west of the highway. He will retain the parcel east of the highway. It's a significant amount of land, but it's not worth much now, if it's ever vacated it would be. Imagine vacating a strip along the west ROW like the above example, then you have the owner east of the highway getting the strip.
In recent years my government employer acquired 2 fire station properties. In both cases my bosses wanted to go to the edge of the road instead of the centerline. I recommended against it but they ignored me, okay hope it’s not a problem 30 years from now. I’m not good at diplomacy so I seem to mostly step on toes then it becomes more about egos.
Theres another situation where we have a boundary with a certain huge federal forest agency, hey why don’t we just talk to them and work with them but way upper management had already been told we absolutely positively have to involve another huge agency that starts with a B. Why? It’s just burned up Forest. Shut up. Okay I’ll shut up now.
Vacation question?
Well, here in Arkansas, a favorite vacation would be to go to the Caddo River, and get a sunburn.
@nate-the-surveyor I think that any one of the pristine mountain lakes or a trout rich river would be more my speed at this age.
A sunburn would be nice after this winter,,,,,,,,,,you are an exceptionally early riser Nate.
National news has been reporting severe weather moving through @nate-the-surveyor 's neck of the woods; I hope Nate and his brood are safe, and didn't suffer any damages.
Prayers to those who have...
We sent it to them, it's a real mess here but not as bad as they are getting. ☹️
Du tackspayur abuttin' wood find it added onto his neckst tacks staytmunt. End of discussin'. Pay yur tacks, Pilgrum.
