I want another opinion about the easement labeled as a 30' road and utility easement along Dublin Road.?ÿ
At the time Lot 1 was purchased the subdivision had not yet been filed, and when it was filed, it didn't include Lot 1.?ÿ
Can the plat create the easements as shown on Lot 1 if the metes and bounds of the plat don't cover it? My assumption is that the unrecorded version of the plat included Lot 1 with the easement in question but then Lot 1 was purchased before the subdivision was finished they decided to not include it in the final plat.
The deed for the property I'm wondering about has specific language about the 50' road easement on the north side. However, it doesn't make mention of the 30' one on the west side of the property.
?ÿ
The road has been there long enough to at least have prescriptive rights and there are utilities in the 30' strip.?ÿ
Does the easement exist?
If there is a prescriptive easement, then yes an easement exists, the only questions being its location, width, uses, restrictions, etc..
The specifics of an easement (location, width, allowed uses, etc.) depend on how the easement was created, which is generally found in common law, based on the unique facts existing in each situation.
A Prescriptive Easement doesn't exist until it is judicated. At that time the Court will determine allowable uses and width of the easement. If it's a hostile action probably $40,000 each minimum in legal fees. The parties would be best off if the just negotiated an easement and got what was agreeable to both parties.
What common folk view as existing is something attorneys see as being very different. ?ÿThey say it doesn't exist until they get all the money they can get.
Well, then there wouldn't be a prescriptive easement?ÿthat I've found yet.?ÿ
I still have this question, though.
Can the plat create the easements as shown on Lot 1 if the metes and bounds of the plat don't cover it??ÿ
?ÿ
If Lot 1 was sold as Lot 1 in the unrecorded subdivision, would it stand to reason that the plat that is recorded showing the easements on Lot 1 was also on the unrecorded version since its shown on the recorded plat?
There is a possibility for a prescriptive easement.
I'd say if the landowner owned Lot 1 and signed a filed Plat that showed the easement then it exists. If it's just shown on preliminary paperwork that was neither signed or filed by the landowner then it wasn't created by the subdivision plat. If it's unfiled but signed by the landowner I'd say it's pretty good evidence to use in the Prescriptive Easement case.
A Plat cannot create an easement without consent of the owner.
As for prescriptive, those easements exist from the time the required fact pattern is met.
A Plat cannot create an easement without consent of the owner.
As for prescriptive, those easements exist from the time the required fact pattern is met.
great summation of two very important facts. Thanks
Were George and Beth Robinson the subdividers? If no, the subdivider can't create easements after the fact on land he didn't own.
Is the Plat you show Dublin Road Estates? If yes, then the recorded version may be the best evidence of what the unrecorded Plat looked like but, on the other hand, the owners of Lot 1 may have a copy of the older unrecorded Plat. The Deed language seems to indicate that the older unrecorded, perhaps Preliminary, Plat did not show the 30' easement on the west.?ÿ On the other hand, if the recorded Plat is the only copy of existence then that would be strong evidence that the Robinsons took title subject to both easements.
However, researching Texas case & statute law will affect the answer too.?ÿ The Easements chapter in a Texas Real Property Treatise would be very helpful bearing in mind this is really a legal question for an Attorney.
I wouldn't look to Prescription yet; in any case, a prescriptive easement is not necessarily 30' wide.
You don't think the unrecorded subdivision being an addition to the city of ___ , has any bearing on this ?
?ÿ
edit: I guess i'm wondering if the the city incorporated the unrecorded subdivision were there some conditions or stipulations to meet compliance?
My opinion: The grantor excepted and reserved 50' for his use and other's across Lot 1. The 30' to the North does not cross Lot 1 as Lot 1 adjoins it. However the 50' easement shown on the plat does cross Lot 1. The grantor did not need an easement along the existing road but did need access to his remainder land. The description is mangled and needs interpretation. The description along and 1' off the road is 30' wide and runs N-S, the 50' description runs E-W and provides access to the grantor's remainder land. I believe the descriptions of both got merged, mangled and some?ÿdetail was lost in the creation of the Lot 1 deed. One needs to show that the map, no matter when it was approved was indeed available prior to the sale of Lot 1, else how could Lot 1 be understood to exist and be a part of an "Unrecorded Subdivision", and was not correctly interpreted and referenced in that first description. One has to look at all the available evidence, of fact and of intent.
Paul in PA
I am not a lawyer but I used to play one on Beerlegger.?ÿ I am a record investigator.?ÿ The question "Can the plat create the easements as shown on Lot 1 if the metes and bounds of the plat don't cover it? " is irrelevant.?ÿ As a surveyor investigating Lot 1 I can report a 30 easement occupied by utilities ( if that's the case) as shown on unrecorded plat xx.?ÿ The issue of the utility having the right to occupy the easement is title issue. The location of the easement is a survey issue.?ÿ
More opinion:
The 30' easement could have been created by statute in place at the time Lot 1 was sold. The 50' easement across Lot 1 was created by the Lot 1 deed and memorialized when the holder of that easement filed the subdivision map of Lot 2 etc. It was un-necessary for the then current owner of Lot 1 to sign off, since it was reserved from him from the start. the Plat as filed shows found record information and proposed subdivision lines, whether or not Lot 1 owner has ever seen it.
Paul in PA
I want another opinion about the easement labeled as a 30' road and utility easement along Dublin Road.?ÿ
That's interesting. I drafted a Hugh Jass subdivision just east of this plat when I worked for Carter and Burgess. Those are some big houses on Estate Lane, if I recall correctly. There was a mobile home development northeast of here where all the streets were named after characters from the show Dallas, but I'm guessing you know why.
More opinion:
The 30' easement could have been created by statute in place at the time Lot 1 was sold. The 50' easement across Lot 1 was created by the Lot 1 deed and memorialized when the holder of that easement filed the subdivision map of Lot 2 etc. It was un-necessary for the then current owner of Lot 1 to sign off, since it was reserved from him from the start. the Plat as filed shows found record information and proposed subdivision lines, whether or not Lot 1 owner has ever seen it.
Paul in PA
What could I find as proof of the statute? Something in the town's minutes of a commissioner's meeting?
I could ask the property current owners if they have any of the original survey documents or if they had a survey done when they bought it. It's changed hands one time since becoming known as Lot 1.?ÿ
FWIW, the grantor of Lot 1 (unplatted) and the subdivider of lots 2-5 are the same.?ÿ
The date of the Robinson's deed is 02-03-86 and the filing date of the subdivision is 12-08-98
I want another opinion about the easement labeled as a 30' road and utility easement along Dublin Road.?ÿ
That's interesting. I drafted a Hugh Jass subdivision just east of this plat when I worked for Carter and Burgess. Those are some big houses on Estate Lane, if I recall correctly. There was a mobile home development northeast of here where all the streets were named after characters from the show Dallas, but I'm guessing you know why.
There are some very nice homes in the neighborhood. Exotic cars pass by frequently. My hand I had with me is quite the motorhead and was quick to name all the cars coming by. One beautiful sports car was coming toward us and he said "That a Fisker Karma!". I thought he was just making up words to keep me on my toes but he wasn't lying?ÿ ??ÿFisker Karma wiki?ÿ
What could I find as proof of the statute? Something in the town's minutes of a commissioner's meeting?
I could ask the property current owners if they have any of the original survey documents or if they had a survey done when they bought it. It's changed hands one time since becoming known as Lot 1.?ÿ
FWIW, the grantor of Lot 1 (unplatted) and the subdivider of lots 2-5 are the same.?ÿ
The date of the Robinson's deed is 02-03-86 and the filing date of the subdivision is 12-08-98
?ÿ
?ÿ
It could be municipal, county or state statute, or accepted public policy. Around here one would look in "Road Return Books" records of the laying out of roads. One may find roadway taking maps at any level. For one project I was given a copy of a state roadway project maps found in the Township garage.?ÿ The State had relocated a state road for a limited access highway and years later for an intersecting limited access highway created another road and abandoned the older to the Township. In PA the sole legal document for a taking may be the set of State Roadway Plans with the Governors signature on same, with never a deed filed. Those I acquire from the State DOT. In Colonial States one might find a King's Highway, 6 rods wide created by the fact that the Army of the King of England marched up it.
Paul in PA
?ÿ