Legal Description Wording Format

I generally like starting at one point too.?ÿ

I think you could be a little clearer with your bounds. I would say something like, "begining at at a point on the west boundary of Lot 1, and the east boundary of the ROW of ...., from which point the SE corner of Lot 1 bears xxx, xxx' along the common line of Lot 1 and the ROW of .. , said line being 27'...."

But actually I would really just say, "the parcel depicted in the survey recorded as...."?ÿ

Posted by: aliquot

But actually I would really just say, "the parcel depicted in the survey recorded as...."?ÿ

There is a plat, recently recorded, which is thoroughly called out in the preamble. Anybody with that plat in hand can easily see that the right of way line 27' east of the road centerline is the west line of Lot 1. So, yeah, I am relying on the map to a degree in the passage above. There will be exhibit maps going along with the description, but they don't always get filed with the description.

But the thing I really want to call attention to is the manner of calling the point of beginning as being bearing/distance from some point rather than jumping through the Commencing at/Beginning at hoop.?ÿ?ÿ

Yes, antecedent calls are confusing, but I've written legal descriptions?ÿ where they are useful in complex situations.?ÿ?ÿ

The POC followed by a POB call can be the hallmark of a jackleg surveyor.?ÿ For example:

"Commencing at the SW corner of Section 23, thence S 24?ø30'02"W 2,414.26 feet to the True Point of Beginning, thence [18 B&D calls encompassing 2 acres or so with nary a reference to adjoinders, physical?ÿmonuments or PLSS lines ] back to the POB."

I once had a supervisor instruct me that the first reference, be it POC or POB, absolutely had to be a physical monument with current pedigree at the courthouse, so if there wasn't one handy, GPS?ÿ a POC 15,000+ feet away and inverse to the POB, then merrily B&D back to POB and that's a perfect description.

I contest that.?ÿ Local control, monuments or not are paramount.?ÿ It involves deed research, massive amounts of time in monument recovery efforts and actually talking (however briefly) with all affected owners.?ÿ My carefully crafted deed may be chockablock full of references to monuments not found,?ÿ calls to adjoiner's lines which are also unstable, but it'l?ÿ be the best description you can buy.

I have no issue with either method, and I see and use both often. Out of curiosity, how do you handle a situation where you need 2 or more courses to get from an identifiable commencement point to the point of beginning??ÿ

My first boss liked to do it that way, one POB. Sometimes it is less confusing to have a POC and POB.

To the point of beginning of this description.

Tomato, potato, whatever...........

Who cares??ÿ As long as?ÿyou are satisfied as a professional that?ÿthe description is adequate for its purpose.?ÿ In other words, whatever blows your skirt up.

I don't understand why some of us obsess on these type of "my way is the right way, and by God if you don't do it my way you are doing it wrong (hello Austin, Texas)" topics.?ÿ This type of pettiness is what has led to the myriad of ridiculous laws many of us now practice under,?ÿtelling us, the supposed professionals, how to our jobs - with more proposed every year.?ÿ Who knows, maybe next year we will have legislative proposals?ÿeither requiring?ÿor forbidding?ÿusing a point of commencement and a point of beginning in a legal (oops, can I use that word without being accused of practicing law?) description?

I know, I know, I'm probably overreacting.......................?ÿ Or, maybe not....................

But, I'll play along as I've only had two Coronas so far tonight.?ÿ?ÿ?ÿ I use whatever?ÿthe situation calls for, but mostly a point of commencement and a point of beginning.?ÿ In my opinion, the most ridiculous is using a point of beginning and a "true" point of beginning (I've still yet to see a "false" point of beginning though).?ÿ

Maybe we should outlaw using a "true" POB without calling out the "false" POB????

Deeds are worded in such a way as to convey importance.

Beginning at a point in the northerly line of Any Street, (50' foot ROW), said point being distant 150.00 feet eastwardly from the intersection of the eastery line of That Street, (50 foot ROW), with said northerly line of Any Street, said beginning point being in the division line of Lots 1 and 2 in Block 3 as shown on a filed map hereinafter mentioned and from said beginning point running; thence

?ÿ

I say double or triple points helps the surveyor establish a pob. The calls have to be looked at in the order of importance.

?ÿ

In the above, the division line makes precedence over the tie if you can establish the division line based on record control. If the division line cannot be recovered because record control is lost, the tie can be used as evidence of where it is.

?ÿ

Granted, each pob is unique but the order of importance for each item has to be ranked and go from there.

?ÿ

If a single pob is used and that call is lost or ambiguous 50 years from now, a second pob could help.

Where it gets fun is where the point of beginning is at a specific spot on a right-of-way that must be tied back to something like the south quarter corner of a PLSS section. ?ÿOne surveyor may use the quarter corner as the point of commencement and state the bearing of a reference line (such as the south line of the southwest quarter) then give a bearing/distance to the point of beginning (mentioning that said point is on the R/W line of such and such road/highway). ?ÿA different surveyor may start at the south quarter corner for the POC then follow the east line of said southwest quarter (on a specific bearing/distance) to where it intersects the R/W line then call out every bit of description to follow the R/W line through its kinks and curves until it gets to the point of beginning of the subject tract. ?ÿIn this case the POB is not at some easily determined distance from the south section line. ?ÿPurists prefer the second approach. ?ÿThe first approach also works but leaves the following surveyor curious as to how the R/W line was determined. ?ÿThis gets especially awkward when historical deed/easement bearings are ignored and bearings from outer space are used instead.

Neither approach is wrong, per se.

A drawing is a property description, a graphic one that contains all the information needed to know about the property being surveyed.

To spell out what that drawing is representing to satisfy the people that look at our drawings as nothing more than a bunch of lines and numbers they can't imagine the meaning is where we come up with what is called a written word property description.

That interpretation should contain all the same information as our drawing and that is why sometimes a "Commencing At" point is used and then follow along retraceable boundaries and lines to get to our "Point of Beginning" when a simple bearing and disance reference between those points depletes much of the real information being transferred from drawing to text.

0.02

Posted by: David Baalman

I have no issue with either method, and I see and use both often. Out of curiosity, how do you handle a situation where you need 2 or more courses to get from an identifiable commencement point to the point of beginning??ÿ

Beginning at a point on the east right of way line of NW 38th Avenue which bears North 01?ø36ƒ??24ƒ? East, 94.66 from a point on the south line of said Lot 1 which bears N88?ø17'34"W, 75.00 feet from the southeast corner thereof, said NW 38^th?ÿAvenue right of way line being parallel to and 27.00 feet easterly of the centerline thereof, thence ...

If I have to go more than 2 legs with this I'll bite the bullet and go with the Commencing at/ Beginning at format.?ÿ?ÿ

POC was new to me when I moved to NC.?ÿ I've grown to appreciate it in a description when combined with our mandatory tie to a NC Geodetic Benchmark.?ÿ

Commencing at NCGS "Quicktie" (N:987,654.32?ÿ E:1,234,567.89) thence N 60?ø 45' 15" E?ÿ ?ÿ1,020.30 feet (NAD83 2011 NC-Grid bearing and distance)?ÿto a 2-inch iron pipe below grade 0.5ft (N:etc?ÿ E: etc), the point of beginning and the northwestern corner of the tract of land herein described...?ÿ

I do both types, POC to POB, also POB with a reference tie, the one I don't like is:

Beginning at a point; thence through a course or more to the True POB, that one reads wrong to me.?ÿ

Posted by: Murphy

POC was new to me when I moved to NC.?ÿ I've grown to appreciate it in a description when combined with our mandatory tie to a NC Geodetic Benchmark.?ÿ

Commencing at NCGS "Quicktie" (N:987,654.32?ÿ E:1,234,567.89) thence N 60?ø 45' 15" E?ÿ ?ÿ1,020.30 feet (NAD83 2011 NC-Grid bearing and distance)?ÿto a 2-inch iron pipe below grade 0.5ft (N:etc?ÿ E: etc), the point of beginning and the northwestern corner of the tract of land herein described...?ÿ

As I said ,whatever floats your boat. But it could just as easily go like this...?ÿ

Beginning at a 2-inch iron pipe below grade 0.5 ft (N:etc?ÿ E: etc) at ?ÿthe northwestern corner of the tract of land?ÿ herein described which bears N60?ø45'15"E?ÿ ?ÿ1,020.30 feet (NAD83 2011 NC-Grid bearing and distance) from NCGS "Quicktie" (N:987,654.32?ÿ E:1,234,567.89) , thence...?ÿ

Posted by: Brian Allen

Tomato, potato, whatever...........

Who cares??ÿ

I don't understand why some of us obsess on these type of "my way is the right way, and by God if you don't do it my way you are doing it wrong (hello Austin, Texas)" topics.?ÿ

Maybe two Coronas is your limit Brian. Who is obsessing? I specifically said IMO either way was correct.?ÿ?ÿ

Nevertheless it is important, when you have a roomful of less experienced techs working for you, that there be a format that they can work to. In that world, your way is the only way. To have it any other way is make your job of reviewing, and trapping errors, very much more difficult. And to have the product coming out of your office be inconsistent.?ÿ