This is an acreage description interpretation.
Original Deed reads the West 1/2 of a certain SW1/4 NE1/4 Except the South 10 Acres.
Said W1/2 being 80 acres more or less.
Today the section breakdown computes out a line 340' north of the south line of said 1/4 1/4 to be 10 acres.
Subsequent deeds include: as written - the most southerly 200 feet of that portion of the 1/4 1/4 lying north of and adjacent
to the southerly 10 acres. This is included with the south 10 acres being the South Parcel.
Other deeds describe the subject 10 acres as the south 20 rods, also the 330 feet, etc.
The argument is: Is the North line of the south parcels 340'+200'= 540' from the south line of said 1/4 1/4.
OR was the intent 1/8 of the 80 acres - 330'+200' = 530' from the south line of the said 1/4 1/4.
This is the basic question at hand, of course a lot more research has been conducted to look at the chain of title.
Any opinions would be appreciated.
There is no distance call.
It would be 10 acres of land, no more, no less.
What do the MONUMENTS say (assuming there are some)?
Loyal
OPPS, forgot that second part
Plus 200 feet north of the 10 acres.
TJE Yogi, post: 343068, member: 963 wrote: This is an acreage description interpretation.
Original Deed reads the West 1/2 of a certain SW1/4 NE1/4 Except the South 10 Acres.
Said W1/2 being 80 acres more or less.Something in error here. SWå?NEå? = 40 Acres. The Wå? of the SWå?NEå? = 20 Acres, Not 80 Acres
TJE Yogi, post: 343068, member: 963 wrote: This is an acreage description interpretation.
Original Deed reads the West 1/2 of a certain SW1/4 NE1/4 Except the South 10 Acres.
Said W1/2 being 80 acres more or less.
Something goofy here. SWå?NEå? = 40 Acres --- Wå? of the SWå?NEå? = 20 Acres, not 80 Acres!
Charles L. Dowdell, post: 343084, member: 82 wrote: Something goofy here. SWå?NEå? = 40 Acres --- Wå? of the SWå?NEå? = 20 Acres, not 80 Acres!
Yes - too many 1/4 - It was the West half of a 1/4 = 80 acres more or less.
No monuments - just section corners currently being a short (less than 2640') 1/4 section on the south line.
There are three possibilities with only two results:
- [INDENT=1]The south 10 acres was surveyed at the time of division and the location as surveyed and monumented is the best available evidence controlling the boundary location, or[/INDENT]
- [INDENT=1]The south 10 acres was surveyed after the conveyance and the parties have relied upon the survey to take occupation of the property by maintaining or perpetuating the boundary, or constructing improvements, or[/INDENT]
- [INDENT=1]No attempt has ever been made to locate and mark the boundary. [/INDENT]
In case of 1 and 2, put your retracement hat on and retrace the boundary as it has been established on the ground. The retracing surveyor has no authority to "fix" anything they "think" was done "wrong."
In the case of 3, rely upon the document as the best available evidence of the original agreement between the grantor and grantee. Apply the rules of construction and place your markers at the appropriate location. Of course this requires that you place yourself in the time and place of the original parties and utilize the corners as already established at that time. Then stake the "south 10-acre line" to as many decimal places as you desire (as long as you meet the MTS). Just make sure to document what evidence you relied upon so the next surveyor can properly retrace your boundary.
Make sure you NEVER roll on to 3 until you've exhausted your investigatory efforts of 1 and 2. The presumption is that the parties entering the original agreement to create the boundary were certain of its location. You first have to overcome that presumption before 3 can be applied.
JBS
1. Is that the first description or is it one provided from your client?
2. Are their adjacent deeds you can find of record? (extrinsic evidence)
Look for deed records when adjacent tracts were created (first deeds) and when the one you are working on was first created.
