for a boundary line that can't be located by the conveying document, deed that refers to a sketch which is pretty bad, so I'm relying on painted tree blazes by the land owner, who happens to be the one who made the crappy sketch in the '70s?
This is a classic situation where the surveyor should shine.
When the document creating the parcel is unclear you turn to the actions and testimony of the owners. It is more than possible the boundary can be recovered with certainty. Even when it can't we should walk the owners to a solution. In some States that means an attorney, others we do the work. At a minimum we need to memorialize our findings for those who follow.
As Mr. Kent would say, don't just slap the math on the ground. The specific answer to your question depends on any number of things. If the writer of the deed made the marks contemporaneous with the sale you may be close to done. You need to interview the buyer ang get their recollections as well. Your nite should be a narrative that walks the reader through the evidence?ÿ
It's a weird situation but somewhat simple.?ÿ The current owner who drew the sketch was also the closing attorney for other parties, and must've told them, "Who needs a surveyor??ÿ I'll draw the plan".?ÿ
He now owns this parcel and the adjoining parcel.?ÿ I asked if the IP's that are shown on the sketch were ever set, and he just grinned and said, "probably not".
He's conveying the other parcel, so I do need to locate these lines, since we don't want to create a new boundary that needs to be approved.?ÿ
Well, if he owns both pieces just ask him where he wants the line to be, imo.
Sure, but as said, we're trying not to create any new lines here.?ÿ So I'm doing my best to retrace the existing line
Getting the owners to agree should be fairly easy...
Hey! You're the surveyor! I hired you to walk right over here pin the exact boundary! I thought you knew what you were doing!
I don't think it would be a new line though.?ÿ It would be parol evidence supporting the location of the sketched line.
what you have said here is "almost" exactly what you should place on the face of your survey plat. (I would)
a little editing and Done.
PS: I am assuming the "sketch" is an attachment to that "conveying document"
if not, you will need to explain where you got your copy, and perhaps include it on an additional sheet of your survey plat.
You know that's almost exactly how he put it, after he let me know there were no IP's set.?ÿ Like I'm supposed to be able to exactly mark out the lines that he created in a vague and ambiguous manner.?ÿ Lawyers, man.....
Parol evidence in my opinion, shouldn't be someone telling me where he meant the line to be.?ÿ
The painted treeline is evidence of where the line was maintained, and without anything but the sketch saying that it might be somewhere else - but not specific, is something to hold.
Look at it this way.?ÿ You plant some pins that the client (who owns both sides) likes and nobody is going to ever prove you wrong.
True.?ÿ And the piece that's being sold will be fully dimensioned on my plan.?ÿ So there will be no ambiguity in what's being conveyed.
?ÿ
- Extrinsic evidence and I think it was Lucas who was the math slapper
Parol evidence in my opinion, shouldn't be someone telling me where he meant the line to be.
Even when that someone is the actual person who established the line?
The painted treeline is evidence of where the line was maintained, and without anything but the sketch saying that it might be somewhere else - but not specific, is something to hold.
I suppose it depends how much of a difference there is between the sketch and the painted line.?ÿ If they're in the same ballpark then I think I'd do what maintains harmony in the neighborhood.
Sounds like an attorney/property owner practicing land surveying when they're not licensed to do so.
A deed to be valid should stand on its own, and not need an explanation to decipher the location of the parcel.?ÿ Extrinsic evidence can be used to explain an expression or clear up an ambiguity, but not to locate the property.
I don't really know.?ÿ The only corner I can figure out is the back one, which is supposed to be 500' from a monument I found.?ÿ Problem is, the painted line puts it about 570' from the monument.?ÿ So I either hold the paint lines or I hold that corner, and then I got nothing
Plan note: S.W.A.G.
The line is where he says it is. And if you make a survey, record that thing, or at least have him use the survey in the legal description. (Or use the legal description on the survey.)
You are essentially arguing that there is no subdivision, and that he is subdividing the land by his action.
If there is a subdivision, the line is where he says it is because he owns both sides. If the line is ambiguous, my understanding is that most jurisdictions allow the adjoining land owners to determine the line...
