The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> > > That is why I put one call on one line.
> > >
> > > Thence: With center line meander of Flat Creek as follows:
> > > S 27°31'11" E, 121.34 feet;
> > > N 89°47'16" E, 345.67 feet;
> >
> > The point of a description is that it is one great big, run-on sentence. English rules regarding sentence structure apply. N 89°47'16" E, 345.67 feet;" isn't a complete sentence (which is required to justify the semi-colon.
>
> That actually doesn't describe standard English usage of the semi-colon to divide a series in which commas appear, as is the case in the best practice that A. Harris describes.
>
> Here's the applicable rule:
>
> Use a semicolon between items in a list or series if any of the items contain commas.
>
> Usage of Semicolons
That's right, Kent... I forgot about the "list containing commas" rule. That's why I'd leave out the commas between the course and distance. They're entirely superfluous. There's no conjunction requiring the comma. Leave out the commas, and go back to using them to separate the list.
;o)
JBS
P.S. Of course, I really don't care how anyone writes the description as long as it's not a re-write of an existing one... ;o)
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> That's right, Kent... I forgot about the "list containing commas" rule. That's why I'd leave out the commas between the course and distance. They're entirely superfluous.
Okay, so you aren't aware of the proper use of commas either. Presumuably you write April 21, 2011 as "April 21 2011". In the case of the courses of a metes and bounds description, the comma is a clarifying separator to distinguish the coordinated parts of different phrases, one expressing the direction, the other the distance. Just because you opt to leave the comma out to make the description more of a muddle than it needs to be doesn't mean that it is good practice. Use the commas to clarify the structure of the parallel elements of course and distance, and add semicolons as described.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> Okay, so you aren't aware of the proper use of commas either. Presumuably you write April 21, 2011 as "April 21 2011". In the case of the courses of a metes and bounds description, the comma is a clarifying separator to distinguish the coordinated parts of different phrases, one expressing the direction, the other the distance. Just because you opt to leave the comma out to make the description more of a muddle than it needs to be doesn't mean that it is good practice. Use the commas for clarity and add semicolons as described.
No, Kent. I do use commas to separate the year from the day. If you really want to get "technical," a course and distance is a single phrase, not "coordinated parts of different phrases" which, as you are correct in pointing out, would require a comma separator. The year augments the day. That's why they are separated. A direction and a distance are entirely unrelated, therefore do not "coordinate" each other. Use of the comma between a course and a distance is superfluous.
But, if you, really want, to over-use, your commas, go, right ahead. Like I said above, I, really, could, care, less...
JBS
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
>If you really want to get "technical," a course and distance is a single phrase, not "coordinated parts of different phrases" which, as you are correct in pointing out, would require a comma separator.
You've almost seen the light then. The call "N36°14'W, 340.14 ft." is an abbreviated form of "on a bearing of N36°14'W, for a distance of 340.14 ft." In the full intended sense, the necessity of the comma is plain. In the abbreviated form commonly used by land surveyors, the comma preserves the structure of the coordinated parts.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
For example, take the familiar Utah metes and bounds description. The typical call, if fully stated, would be:
"on a bearing of N36°14'W, for a distance of 340.14 ft., to a fence post"
In the abbreviated form, you're left with:
"N36°14'W, 340.14 ft., a fence post"
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> For example, take the familiar Utah metes and bounds description. The typical call, if fully stated, would be:
>
> "on a bearing of N36°14'W, for a distance of 340.14 ft., to a fence post"
>
> In the abbreviated form, you're left with:
>
> "N36°14'W, 340.14 ft., a fence post"
This is really funny coming from the "King of Superfluity." How many pages long was your last description?
We stopped using all those extra words a long time ago. Nowadays you're more likely to hear it stated as, "running from that fince post over thar; then running up yonder thataway along the fince till you git to that 'nother post up on over thar." We don't need none of that technical jargon in there confusing up the works. ;o)
Seriously, though. I've never seen the need to clarify that "N36°14'W" is a "bearing," or that "340.14 feet" is a "distance." When you don't waste time and space having to explain such mundane elements as "bearings" and "distances" you will find that it's much easier to simply state the obvious as in: "thence N36°14'W 340.14 feet to a fence post." No need for contractions, abreviations or commas.
JBS
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> Seriously, though. I've never seen the need to clarify that "N36°14'W" is a "bearing," or that "340.14 feet" is a "distance."
Nonetheless, the comma preserves the structure of the data, just as a comma between X and Y values of a coordinate pair would. I'll bet that if we were to compare examples of thoughtfully written metes and bounds descriptions to the sort of engineer format you've adopted, evidently without ever really thinking about it, the differences in legibility and clarity would be quite plain to any land surveyor.
Why not post an example of what you think is a really good metes and bounds description of some survey you've turned out? I've posted more than half a dozen of mine over the years.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
As to dates, I believe it would be proper to leave off the comma when you do it in order of day, month, then year. It is the order of heirarchy, 22 April 2011 when it is 22 of April of 2011. Since it is out-of-order, I think that is when you use the comma: April 22, 2011. (point being that 22 os a sub-part of April, and April is a sub-part of 2011)
Same with order of fractional sections to section. NW1/4 SW 1/4 Section 22, Township 3 South, Range 68 West; if it's the NW1/4 of the SW1/4; and a comma if it's NW 1/4 and the SW 1/4. You put in the comma between the equal-heirarchy levels. I would apply the same theory to bearing and distance. comma between them unless you had some words of clarification. Either N23º42'18"W, 213.45' or N23º42'18"W a distance of 213.45'
(in the case of the fractional sections, I prefer to spell out "of the" or "and" for clarity, than rely on the confusion of commas)
I have a question for all of you. Do you find it wise to spell out what the degree symbol, minute symbol, and second symbol mean they first time they are used in your description? What about the cardinal directions....ie N for north, W for West, etc.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> I have a question for all of you. Do you find it wise to spell out what the degree symbol, minute symbol, and second symbol mean they first time they are used in your description?
No. Any surveyor who doesn't recognize the significance of the ° symbol isn't going to be helped by seeing it spelled out as "degrees". Ditto, spelling out "feet" when "ft." is unambiguous once we know which foot is being used.
> What about the cardinal directions....ie N for north, W for West, etc.
The surveyors who insist on rendering a direction like "N36°15'25"W" as "North 36 degrees 15 minutes 25 seconds West" are in league with Satan. They've filled the public records with descriptions that need to be retyped just to be legible. Usually, these are the same characters who write the whole description as if every carriage return costs them $500, producing a dense mat of typing that is just painful to read.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
>
> No. Any surveyor who doesn't recognize the significance of the ° symbol isn't going to be helped by seeing it spelled out as "degrees". Ditto, spelling out "feet" when "ft." is unambiguous once we know which foot is being used.
>
> The surveyors who insist on rendering a direction like "N36°15'25"W" as "North 36 degrees 15 minutes 25 seconds West" are in league with Satan. They've filled the public records with descriptions that need to be retyped just to be legible. Usually, these are the same characters who write the whole description as if every carriage return costs them $500, producing a dense mat of typing that is just painful to read.
Kent: but how do you really feel?
I can certainly understand your point. However I was only referring to spelling it out "once" and putting the abbreviation in parentheses....then going to the abreviation or symbols for all of the other occurances. Also, aren't the recorded legal descriptions in the public records to put the general public on notice and not just for other surveyors?
Could I also apply your sentiment to the "commas"? That all surveyors know what the bearing and then the distance means without the commas? How about an "assessor's abbreviated description with almost no full words at all? Maybe we can get rid of calls to monuments.
example:
TR IN NW4 SEC 7-12-66 DESC AS FOLS: COM AT THE NELY
COR OF VOYAGER PKWY AS PLATTED IN NORTHGATE FIL NO 7,
TH S 10º55'13" W 854.32 FT, S 68º46'16" E 50.39 FT,
TH ALG ARC OF CUR TO L HAVING A RAD OF 2060.0 FT
A C/A OF 14º43'14" WHICH CHORD BEARS
N 82º32'15" E 529.26 FT FOR POB, TH
S 28º47'59" W 81.54 FT, S 66º24'19" W 367.43 FT,
S 72º14'23" W 446.89 FT, S 66º10'40" W 289.41 FT,
....
TO A PT ON THE WLY R/W LN OF VOYAGER PKWY, TH RUN
NLY ALG SD VOYAGER PKWY TO POB
😉
FYI
Wattles doesn't put commas between bearings and distances.
I use my semi-colon to process softer foods like yogurt.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> However I was only referring to spelling it out "once" and putting the abbreviation in parentheses....then going to the abreviation or symbols for all of the other occurances. Also, aren't the recorded legal descriptions in the public records to put the general public on notice and not just for other surveyors?
It's going to be a long wait for you if you are expecting members of the general public to be able to perfectly understand a metes and bounds description in the sense of being able to plot it up or locate it on the ground. The notice is usually provided by other parts of the description such as source of title or situation with respect to the underlying land grant.
If you want to tell someone what the degree symbol means, should you also explain what the numerals mean, possibly with pictures of hands holding up numbers of fingers?
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> Could I also apply your sentiment to the "commas"? That all surveyors know what the bearing and then the distance means without the commas? How about an "assessor's abbreviated description with almost no full words at all? Maybe we can get rid of calls to monuments.
>
> example:
> TR IN NW4 SEC 7-12-66 DESC AS FOLS: COM AT THE NELY
> COR OF VOYAGER PKWY AS PLATTED IN NORTHGATE FIL NO 7,
> TH S 10º55'13" W 854.32 FT, S 68º46'16" E 50.39 FT,
> TH ALG ARC OF CUR TO L HAVING A RAD OF 2060.0 FT
> A C/A OF 14º43'14" WHICH CHORD BEARS
> N 82º32'15" E 529.26 FT FOR POB, TH
> S 28º47'59" W 81.54 FT, S 66º24'19" W 367.43 FT,
> S 72º14'23" W 446.89 FT, S 66º10'40" W 289.41 FT,
> ....
> TO A PT ON THE WLY R/W LN OF VOYAGER PKWY, TH RUN
> NLY ALG SD VOYAGER PKWY TO POB
Tom:
I realize that you don't have much experience dealing with metes and bounds descriptions, but isn't it obvious what the shortcoming of your example is? You left out the calls for fence posts. Or is it just assumed that all boundaries run between them, so it would be unnecessary?
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> If you want to tell someone what the degree symbol means, should you also explain what the numerals mean, possibly with pictures of hands holding up numbers of fingers?
That is a good idea. Some transcribers just do not understand what ° ' " mean. I have seen quite a few times 45 degrees 51 feet 22 inches in a legal.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
>
> Tom:
>
> .... You left out the calls for fence posts. Or is it just assumed that all boundaries run between them, so it would be unnecessary?
Yes....that's the point isn't it? All surveyors already know that the bounds run between the fence posts: so why would we have to actually write those pesky monument calls in the description....we aren't getting paid per word afterall.
(and no...I don't expect the general public to fully understand legal descriptions. But regardless, the legal description and the deed is the public document of record: wasn't that why we want those silly commas in the right place?)
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> (and no...I don't expect the general public to fully understand legal descriptions. But regardless, the legal description and the deed is the public document of record: wasn't that why we want those silly commas in the right place?)
The whole point of it being in the public record is so that the precise arrangement for the disposition of some interest in real property is memorialized permanently in a way that any person familiar with such things may know of it. The object of the exercise is to get genuinely useful information about those arrangements into the record in a way that assists its retrieval, not cater to the most idiotic members of the public who probably can't even find their way to the recorder's office in the first place.
FYI
> Wattles doesn't put commas between bearings and distances.
Were you under the impression that Wattles offers really good examples of metes and bounds descriptions? His examples were probably fine in the era of manual typewriters when there was an extreme premium for brevity and it was assumed that all descriptions would be endlessly retyped. Not so much anymore and hasn't really been that way for decades now.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
Kent,
So.....I guess you don't write out the whole words.
The semi-colon is of course correct usage
> Kent,
> So.....I guess you don't write out the whole words.
No. Kent uses "commas" instead of words... ;o)
JBS