How much does it cost...

I guess it depends on where you are located. In about 2007 I found a great retirement property in West Virginia. After scouring the state, I finally found 168 acres of flat meadow mountain top. The mineral rights had already been sold and there were natural gas wells that existed on the property, guaranteeing free gas for heating, cooking and other uses.

Being a surveyor and having a retired fire chief in the family who was also looking for a mountain property, we made several trips to the property located 300 miles from home, we liked it and met the sales agent on site during our final trip, to make sure that we wanted to make an offer.

When we met the agent, I had already done a ton of research in the year I spent looking for properties in the state. At the time, buildable property was selling for $1,000.00/acre. I was aware that there was an access easement through a neighbors property because the main entrance to it was pretty steep and eroded. I started the Q & A, session with "how much do you think it would cost to have the property surveyed?", answer, "what do you want to pay for a survey for? You can just walk the lines with your neighbors and they'll show you where the lines and corners are". Next question, "we want to build two custom log cabins, log cabins, what is the process as far as approvals of the plot plans, inspections and the like. The answer, "what are you talking about? If you want to build, you go to town hall with a sketch of what you want to build, tell them how much it will cost and they'll issue a permit based on the cost. There are no inspections, they figure that if you are comfortable living in it, so are they".

After the Q & A session, I figured that he was full of crap and called both the Town Hall and County and both confirmed what we were told. After hearing this from the source we made an offer of $1,100/ acre, knowing that I had the resources to do the boundary work, topo, etc. to design the work and one of my techs was a W. VA LS. We ended up in a bidding war that we lost by $8,000.

It was a mind blowing experience for me, being from NJ, a completely different culture. In NJ, you can't put a shovel in the ground to build something without having a current survey, grading and drainage designs, planning/zoning board approvals, inspections and more, all of which are paid for out of the applicant's escrow account.

I would say, whoever signs your contract.

Chris is NJ one of the only states where the LS actually rules in regards to boundaries vs lawyers and judges on determining the boundaries. I might be off the mark a bit but seems in NJ you have a bit more weight vs the rest of the USA when determining a boundary vs a judge . Seems I had a conversation once at a seminar recently might have been under the influence at FIG last year but the way the LS from NJ phrased it one night was a bit different than I am use to hearing. I am more under the impression we simply show the evidence and are called as witnesses and a judge decides. Vs what this fella was stating but it was a late night and we all know ho that can go. I still would love to come just sit down with you for a bit just to learn. You most definitely always have some great statements to make and man if I could go back and re do several years be nice to have worked under you for sure. I am sure you would have worn steel toes to put a boot in me. lol. I have always asked way too many questions.

OleManRiver,

I'm no expert on NJ Law, but I would like to address the old wives tale of 'just giving the evidence'. That oversimplification has led to many horrid district court decisions, and perpetrated gross fraud on more landowners than I can count. Please keep in mind my comments are directed at the profession in general..

If a court does not agree with your placement of a boundary, somebody failed. The options for who and how aren't terribly complex. If the Surveyor failed it is usually one of two things.

First, we took the wrong case. It amazes me the number of 'experts' who manufacture, twist, and contort evidence to justify collecting a fee. Now there are a lot of subcategories here. Failing to know relevant fact patterns, refusing to accept clear evidence, or even attempting to intentionally mislead the Court. It doesn't matter the reason, just don't take cases that are not supported by facts and law. Learn to be honest with yourself and prospective clients. Most know this before the I-Man stage, but many seem to forget.

The second type of failure is simply not leading the Court to the correct decision. Do not confuse this with advocating. I'm talking about working with counsel to ensure the facts are presented so that a non-surveyor can see the the pattern they create. No manufacturing or obscuring evidence, but not simply laying out the facts and hoping the audience gets it. Walk them through the law and how each piece of evidence makes the path to the legal conclusion. Again, lots of subcategories here. Incompetence, hubrus, or just plain mistakes. These are important to us for growth but the client doesn't care. His outcome is the same.

I have found that structuring the right case and leading the hearing officer to a correct conclusion is a rewarding experience. It forces me to learn more about myself than any other pursuit. I am exceedingly grateful none of my mistakes have led to an incorrect outcome, and I'm under no illusion that's because of me. Work with the right people, take the right cases, do your best to be less full of crap every day. That's my recipe and it's worked well so far...

"If a court does not agree with your placement of a boundary, somebody failed."

This. My semi smart alecky answer whenever questions about boundary determination come up is that there is always one location for the boundary, and it's always the same... "where, if adjudicated, the court of proper jurisdiction would place it."

The original 13 colonies (colonial states) are much different than the PLSS states when it comes to how boundary lines are constructed. We are metes and bound states and are not bound by the rectangular system. There are no section corners, quarter sections and the like.

No matter how you look at it, our job mostly comes down laying title lines on the ground based on filed documents, original intent and best available evidence. We do not determine ownership, title lines and ownership lines are completely different issues in certain cases and in some cases, the two can conflict when certain factors like adverse possession come into play.

In another thread somewhere in this group, somebody described our role as being quasi judicial and I do not agree at all with that statement. Except for in extremely rare cases, we are not licensed to practice law. When a dispute arises over title versus claimed ownership, ending up in court, it is our obligation to layout our findings to the court based on the chain of title, sometimes involving searching back to colonial era documents, physical and parole evidence and all other matters revolving around boundary laws. It is our responsibility to clearly walk the courts through, what we found, how we applied both physical and recorded evidence and explain it as clearly as possible in layman's terms. Where title lines conflict with claimed ownership, only the judge can make that determination but, if we have done our jobs correctly and explained our conclusions correctly, it should lead the judge to agree with our findings, except for very rare situations like adverse possession, prescriptive easements and other technicalities come into play. We are considered expert witnesses in these situations, there to educate the courts, but do not have the judicial powers that the judge does.

In my 30 years as an LS, I have only been involved in three cases, two of them involving being called as an expert witness in construction error cases and the last being defending my survey where an adjoiner was constructing improvements over the line. My survey was based on an actual field survey and showed the control found and held, the adjoiners survey showed nothing found or held. There was a pretrial conference held by zoom in the COVID shut down and both of us surveyors attended the zoom meeting.

We two surveyors were not sequestered and both were questioned on how we arrived at our conclusions. I spoke first, explaining what I had found and accepted, and then hinted that in prior conversations that I had with the other surveyor, he was not relying on an actual field survey but a paper copy of a 30 year old hand drawn survey, purchased in a collection of records prepared by an LS who passed away years ago. When the other surveyor was forced to admit that I was correct in my insinuation that he had not done an actual field survey, the case ended there with my line being ruled the correct line, the other surveyor's line being the errant line and it moved on to what he was going to pay out in damages. We are experts, but we are not judges. While it is true that we, as surveyors, should understand common and case laws, it is not our position to apply them.

"The mineral rights had already been sold and there were natural gas wells that existed on the property, guaranteeing free gas for heating, cooking and other uses."

That's a complicated subject, it will be unusual that a landowner will be able to use gas produced off the property through a well. Lots of reason why that's not allowed, but like anything there are exceptions.

That is only true to a certain extent. One cannot know where the courts will adjudicate the line(s) to be. In NJ, all land dispute cases are heard in the County Superior Court. The judges in that system are the same judges that handle everything (criminal cases, divorce cases, small claims, etc.) and are not versed in boundary law. As experts, we can lay out our findings based on evidence and quote statute law, common law and even reference any relevant case law, but the Judge will rule on their own interpretation of them and that could vary from Judge to Judge.

The wells are on the property and cannot be tapped directly from the wells. The mineral rights sales agreement said, in no uncertain terms, that the utility would provide free natural gas until such time as it ceases to be collected on the parcel.

I never questioned how the connection would work but I certainly would not attempt to connect to a well on my own. How they handled the supply would be up to them to figure out.

Chris,<div>

The PLSS States require the same process as metes and bounds States. We just have an additional underlying fabric and (usually) much shorter history.

Some land tenure systems have developed in ways that limit the function of surveyors, others have not. In the States I practice, boundaries and rights are established the moment the fact pattern is met. It is our duty and quasi-judicial function to recognize relevant fact patterns and ambiguities. We then walk the owners through understanding establishment or solving ambiguity. While we do not adjudicate contested cases, we certainly do go beyond 'expert witnesses'. When the court does decide the location, they still turn to us to locate, mark, and memorialize the lines and corners.

</div>

Thanks. Goood information for a green horn like me to know.

"When the court does decide the location, they still turn to us to locate, mark, and memorialize the lines and corners."

I not certain in what context you are using the term quasi judicial. Merium Webster defines quasi judicial as follows:

Partly judicial character

<hr>

The meaning of QUASI-JUDICIAL is having a partly judicial character by possession of the right to hold hearings on and conduct investigations into disputed claims and alleged infractions of rules and regulations and to make decisions in the general manner of courts.

We do not convene hearings, however, we do conduct investigations and gather evidence in the course of our surveys. We do not investigate alleged infractions of rules and regulations, when we encounter them, it is our obligation to report them to the State Board for them to investigate and take action on in the general manner of the courts.

Where we encounter conditions that are in conflict with title lines, we collect the evidence found and present it to the courts, we do not make decisions based on the general manner of the courts. We document lines of possession and use, we do not go beyond that as we are not empowered to adjudicate on conflicts between title lines and ownership lines. Doing so would amount to practicing law without a license.

Chris,

Blacks Law defines a 'quasi-judicial act' as 'A judicial act performed by one not a judge'. This fits the decsription in my post and is no doubt what Cooley was describing in his famous (though now mostly forgotten) treatise describing the duties of a Surveyor.

As an aside, the administrative procedures act in some States allows a licensee to prosecute violations by fellow liensees through the use of an administrative hearing officer. We don't have to wait on the Board to investigate and prosecute. The recommendations of a hearing officer are enforced (or not) by the relevant Board or Commission.

Please understand that I am not arguing with you but, simply debating the judicial aspect of the conversation. By any definition of the word "judicial", that leaves those powers outside of our wheelhouse.

The quasi judicial powers of the individual State Boards are defined by State Statute and rules where the Board members are appointed to enforce the rules and regulations.

In what you have said about a hearing, as far as filing charges, you made it clear to me that the hearer of fact must be approved, making that individual also quasi judicial, and both you or I merely being the people presenting the evidence.

I would be interested to read any State statutes, from any state, that give us any sort of judicial powers without being a part of the judiciary. "Quasi is a Latin term meaning "as if" or "similar to"¹². In legal terms, quasi is used to describe situations where an action or decision is taken in a way that is almost similar to a legal or judicial process, but not quite the same¹. Quasi-legal refers to actions or decisions that are not strictly legal, but are made or enforced by an entity with some legal authority or influence³. A quasi contract is an obligation invoked by law in the absence of an agreement².

"Quasi-legal refers to actions or decisions that are not strictly legal, but are made or enforced by an entity with some legal authority or influence³<font color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" face="inherit">." This is the key to the legal definition of quasi judicial. What it essentially is saying is that we can form our own opinions based in common or case law and recite either or both, but only the courts can make a ruling that is </font>enforceable<font color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" face="inherit">.</font>

<font color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" face="inherit">We gather and present evidence, we are not the finders of fact. We can state our professional opinions based on what we have found but that is the full extent of our authority an LS.</font>

<font color="rgba(0, 0, 0, 0)" face="inherit">I learned this the hard way when I first sat for my exam back in April, 1992. I was tricked into answering questions based on what the courts would decide and failed a portion of the test based on that when there was an option in the multiple choices to advise your client to consult an Attorney. Once I made an appointment to review my exam and discovered why my answers were wrong, I was licensed on my second attempt in late 1992.</font>

"I would be interested to read any State statutes, from any state, that give us any sort of judicial powers without being a part of the judiciary."

The phrase, as used by Cooley (If I remember correctly from reading a couple of decades ago), is less that we are specifically given judiciary powers, and more that they are laid upon us in a defacto manner.

If it is the court's power and place to be the final arbitrator of boundary locations, and the courts do not have the capacity, ability, or desire, to adjudicate every boundary, then the individual surveyors empowered by the state to perform boundary determinations and monument boundaries for the citizen has the duty to make those decisions in a way that attempts to reflect a final result that would mirror the result as if it were adjudicated.

When Harry Homeowner and his neighbor are at odds with each other over a boundary, while the authoritative location of the line in question is in the court's court (as it were), 99% of the time they don't have the desire or financial resources to have the question of the location answered in court, a surveyor is engaged, and that surveyor's decision is (generally) accepted by the landowners as a stand-in for the judicial system.