Here's a 14 page pdf put together by the American Bar Association.
What Every Lawyer Should Know About Title Surveys
It makes the point that any boundary issue cannot be determined without a proper survey.
It's a very well put together document. One thing I thought was interesting is how the author took the time to make the distinction between a lawyer as an advocate for their client and a surveyor (or survey) as a pragmatic and analytical process. A process in which we weigh evidence toward an equitable determination based on field discovery and available documentation, not always in our client's favor.
Sometimes I wonder if I and other surveyors don't lose sight of this sometimes. I hope we all can rise to the expectations that are described in this literature.
> Here's a 14 page pdf put together by the American Bar Association.
This is possibly the sentence I like least in that piece:
A land survey should always show the occupied lines together with the deed record lines and the extent of any mismatch.
I personally would prefer something along these lines:
Where the survey relies nearly exclusively upon the evidence of use and occupation to determine the location of the tract, this fact and its practical implications should be discussed in an accompanying surveyor's report.
It's a good article.
I have never had a problem working with lawyers.
In working with "big city" lawyers from and for those big cities here in Ohio such as Cleveland, Columbus, etc. it has been generally smooth sailing as they all seem to get the rule of merger, riparian rights as they apply here, title research, etc. It's actually a pleasure to work with professionals who know what they are doing. I have always had the feeling that most of them see it the same way.
"The Survey and The Real Estate Transaction" from AOLS in Ontario:
Cheers,
Derek
hahaha...:-D
