The sole point of this post is to gain opinions on what to do with conflicting corners when a conflict is discovered and asked to be resolved. This is not a situation of what to do with multiple pins at a pin cushion.
For this post responders should assume that it has been determined that a 75' wide parcel was INTENDED to fall in between two parcels that leave a 75' wide tract between them. Corners placed 20 years ago put all 4 corners 2.2' to the south. I can and will stake the new corners. I will "modernize" the legal by adjusting the lead-in and qualifying to adjoiners' corners. This solution leaves all deeds in agreement (within mathematical reason, +/- 0.15'), all parcels with deeded area/frontage, and doesn't not disturb existing occupation.
The only question I am asking is...what would you do with the old corners that have caused past confusion and might cause future confusion? Leave or pull?
All 4 corners were staked by the previous 20 year old survey.
I'm kind of leaning towards holding the four corners as staked.
That is a good solution, provided that your professional opinion of the boundary location agrees with those locations. Accepting 20 year old monuments is a good default decision; however; in this case the OP seems to think otherwise.
I am inclined to agree with him. The law tends to abhore useless small strips of "unowned" land. The overlap also needs to be evaluated based on senior rights, and any other applicable principles.
Edit: On second thought, I forgot the problem only 2'. Depending on the situation on the ground, just chalking it up to a harmless measurement error could be the best solution.
Yes, this is just a situation in a vacuum, since we don't know all of the details. I've said before that my inclination is to hold found monuments, until I can find a reason not to. So, yes, I'll pull out and use my professional judgment in this situation too
The only bar from a prior surveyor that I recall ever pulling was multiple feet from the original spot, horizontal and covered with about two inches of soil. It had sort of an "S" shape from having been hit by some sort of heavy equipment and left, unnoticed, where I found it several years later. The morasse cap was still intact.
The only question I am asking is...what would you do with the old corners that have caused past confusion and might cause future confusion? Leave or pull?
There is already a record of those monuments; they are still evidence, even if conflicting evidence, and I would hesitate to pull them in the absence of a boundary line agreement, boundary line adjustment, or court decision.
I would simply reference them (and reference them well, none of that "monument found SE of calc corner" BS) and explain their role in my boundary determination on the face of the survey. It would be best to gather the adjoining landowners and explain the facts, and your decision, to them before finalizing the survey.
If they are agreeable, then perhaps it's time to employ @murphy 's strategy of hinting that those old monuments will be nothing but trouble if left in the ground and leave it to the landowners.
If there is the slightest hint of a possibility of a disagreement, I would be hesitant to remove long-standing evidence myself, even if I am not holding it and have already referenced it.
@scott-bordenet given that, I would pull. Leaving has a higher potential for causing harm than pulling.
Even if it were permitted by my Board of Registration I would NEVER pull someone else's monument. I have on a few occasions reset my own in cases where I knew something had been disturbed by a property owner or a fence or utility company. I just show everything I find on my map and record it so folks down the road can see what I found and did.
Even if it were permitted by my Board of Registration I would NEVER pull someone else's monument. I have on a few occasions reset my own in cases where I knew something had been disturbed by a property owner or a fence or utility company. I just show everything I find on my map and record it so folks down the road can see what I found and did.
All 4 corners were staked by the previous 20 year old survey.
I'm kind of leaning towards holding the four corners as staked.
That is a good solution, provided that your professional opinion of the boundary location agrees with those locations. Accepting 20 year old monuments is a good default decision; however; in this case the OP seems to think otherwise.
I am inclined to agree with him. The law tends to abhore useless small strips of "unowned" land. The overlap also needs to be evaluated based on senior rights, and any other applicable principles.
Edit: On second thought, I forgot the problem only 2'. Depending on the situation on the ground, just chalking it up to a harmless measurement error could be the best solution.
Yes, this is just a situation in a vacuum, since we don't know all of the details. I've said before that my inclination is to hold found monuments, until I can find a reason not to. So, yes, I'll pull out and use my professional judgment in this situation too
Got to watch what you say, and what you mean. By "pull them out", I meant, professional judgement, not monuments
I am curious as to why you and another Surveyor both found that there was a gap on one side and overlap on the other and you advise the owner to concede the overlap and claim the gap. How does that work? The best advice would have been to include an attorney in the discussion.
Absent a quit claim deed for the gap, what you have effectively done is advised your client to give the land in the overlap up with no guarantee of gaining title to the gap. Even in a simultaneous conveyance that would not be the way to handle it.
Never done this before. What do you think?
I might be inclined to simply let the owners pull them if they're so motivated.
Update: held adjoiners' described lines, corners staked, legal updated lead-in on buyer's deed and qualified to adjoiners (replaces old description), title insurer happy, lender happy, seller happy, buyer happy, no gaps, no overlaps, no occupation issues, all have deeded acreage, all have deeded frontage, property to close tomorrow.
Did I mention no attorneys?
