Establishment Doctrines...

Interesting unpublished case which I found because it cites Bryant:
Soroush-Azar v. Palmer, Unpublished (2013), 2013 WL 5293692

It's fairly complex, involving 3 owners and the City of San Diego in La Jolla. The three owners got the end of Virginia Way abandoned by lawsuit then there were suits among the three of them (the neighborhood block parties must be interesting). Two on the north side, a fence was declared an agreed boundary (it looks like subjective uncertainty to me in spite of Martin v Van Bergen), one on the south side got the street via adverse possession from neighbor to the north (not clear why the owner to the north would have record title to the south side of the street). The AP perfected despite no payment of taxes because the street is not taxed. It is a claim of right AP so only covers actual possession. All this was affirmed by the Appellate Court.

Another case in Humboldt County was affirmed on the substantial evidence rule. The prevailing party had a survey, the other party did not challenge the survey in trial then complained about it to the Appellate Court which responded, nope, too late.

Dave Karoly, post: 354598, member: 94 wrote: That is the danger of writing a book or anything, someone is sure to misuse it...

I agree; that is why I am never going to write a book, and decided I am damn sure never going to read one. There is just too much opportunity to misuse it. 😉

This is an excellent thread, and I think it needs to go back to the front. My 2 cents, Jp

Dave K,

How's the book coming? I hope you are still working on it.

Regards,
Larry

Dave Karoly, post: 353878, member: 94 wrote: It may have to do with remedies. The only legal remedy is damages, everything else, such as quiet title, ejectment, and declaratory relief is equitable.

Chuck, in his book, says that prior to Brown there were two camps in Surveying known by their pejorative names: the deed line stakers who only staked their client's Deed even in the face of senior rights, and the fence line Surveyors who only mapped occupation lines. He said Curt Brown sought a middle way of surveying Record Title boundaries leaving the conflict with occupation up to the Courts. Karayan's book advocates for a position a little more towards the occupation side by complying with all of the boundary laws. I think Brown tried to do that towards the end of his life.

I believe the Surveyor in Ernie v. Trinity Lutheran Church staked the client's Deed description ignoring the fact that the Church's original boundary with Ernie, if it had been held, would've prevented the whole litigation in the first place. As it was our Supreme Court ruled an agreement could be inferred therefore it is an agreed boundary. For decades here, the Surveyor would stake the Deed and the court, depending on the evidence would either agree or waive it off using the Agreed Boundary Doctrine to clear the conflict.

"I think Brown tried to do that towards the end of his life."

He definitely did - in his paper in the ACSM Journal, and I thought he explained things pretty clearly. What I've never understood is how Robillard missed it, or why he ignores it.

Jim in AZ, post: 401395, member: 249 wrote: "I think Brown tried to do that towards the end of his life."

He definitely did - in his paper in the ACSM Journal, and I thought he explained things pretty clearly. What I've never understood is how Robillard missed it, or why he ignores it.

The flow of boundary law has not been explained correctly, in my opinion. It is setup to flow from the Deed to the ground. Acquiescence operates to stabilize imperfectly marked boundaries, not just fences. What has been advocated is stopping at the end of the first half, and incorrectly calling established boundaries "unwritten rights."

Dave Karoly, post: 401397, member: 94 wrote: The flow of boundary law has not been explained correctly, in my opinion. It is setup to flow from the Deed to the ground. Acquiescence operates to stabilize imperfectly marked boundaries, not just fences. What has been advocated is stopping at the end of the first half, and incorrectly calling established boundaries "unwritten rights."

What about the book? 🙂 I too, am waiting patiently. Thanks, Jon

eapls2708, post: 354580, member: 589 wrote: The deed will never tell you where the boundary is. But any valid deed will always tell you where to begin looking for it. The courts use the facts and the rules of evidence to make those determinations. They don't like to resort to measurements (they never make their own and don't necessarily trust the "experts" to have done it without error), and will normally avoid doing so unless there is no competent, reliable physical evidence to indicate where the boundary actually is. We are supposed to do the same thing - use the facts and the laws of evidence.

Cooley is completely consistent.

You need to print that paragraph nice and fancy and frame it for your office wall! Then teach each member of your staff what it means and make sure they memorize it. Maybe do something like "beat the bounds" a time or two to make sure they don't forget. Nicely put!