Two Descriptions, Deed 1 is west of Deed 2.
Something is off about the two deeds, took me a while to figure it out.?ÿ
They aren't my descritptions, they are mid 1970's type of descriptions from the area.?ÿ
Anyway, typical real world problem:
Deed 1
?ÿDeed 2
?ÿTwo clues jump out when you look at the deeds together.?ÿ
9 vs 0
one extra call
9 vs 0
one extra call
Extra call?
"thence N87?ø20'43"E, 874.93 feet; along the north property line of Tract 1 .... "?ÿ
"thence N87?ø20'43"E, 874.93 feet to a point on the north property line of Tract 1 .... "?ÿ
If you run parallel to a line you are never going to intersect it.?ÿ
?ÿ
Also - readability is enhanced if you make each "thence" a new line. There is no law that says you have to cram a description into an unreadable block of text, like a telegram in which you are paying for every letter, space, and punctuation mark. STOP.
"thence N87?ø20'43"E, 874.93 feet; along the north property line of Tract 1 .... "?ÿ
"thence N87?ø20'43"E, 874.93 feet to a point on the north property line of Tract 1 .... "?ÿ
If you run parallel to a line you are never going to intersect it.?ÿ
?ÿ
Also - readability is enhanced if you make each "thence" a new line. There is no law that says you have to cram a description into an unreadable block of text, like a telegram in which you are paying for every letter, space, and punctuation mark. STOP.
In deed 1 it's the north line of the tract, in deed 2 it's the tie to the point of beginning.?ÿ
A
Ya got me Moe, I'm still confused as to what a "POINT" is. I've found all kinds of stuff in the field, but never one a them things? ?????ÿ
@norman-oklahoma Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see anywhere that indicates it is running parallel. It seems to me to indicate it is running on the line. It starts on the north line and then runs 874.93 feet to a point on the north line.
Ya got me Moe, I'm still confused as to what a "POINT" is. I've found all kinds of stuff in the field, but never one a them things? ?????ÿ
Breaking habits is hard!!!
I had this employee that would write "thence to a point, said point monumented with a 2" Aluminum Cap Per xxxxx"
I think he read it somewhere in a seminar book.?ÿ
I said why not say "thence to a 2" Aluminum Cap per xxxxx"?ÿ
Had to have that point in there.
Had to have that point in there.
Guess he just wanted to make his point

If Deed 1 and Deed 2 were taken out of the same parent parcel, it seems likely that the first NW call of Deed 1 and corresponding call of Deed 2 should be the same for both, as HC pointed out, with the 0 vs 9.
In my first attempt at fitting these, neither closed satisfactorily, but I haven't worked at checking my transcription yet. It seems as though the south end of the common line should move northwesterly or the north end southeasterly 80 some feet.
Have you figured out how to get them to close?
If Deed 1 and Deed 2 were taken out of the same parent parcel, it seems likely that the first NW call of Deed 1 and corresponding call of Deed 2 should be the same for both, as HC pointed out, with the 0 vs 9.
In my first attempt at fitting these, neither closed satisfactorily, but I haven't worked at checking my transcription yet. It seems as though the south end of the common line should move northwesterly or the north end southeasterly 80 some feet.
Have you figured out how to get them to close?
Yes, there is an error in the common line, if you notice both mis-close by 90.33&4 feet and almost an identical bearing.
Maybe I'm missing something but I don't see anywhere that indicates it is running parallel.
Same bearing. Undoubtedly you are correct that both calls are running along the line, but that is not how it reads when read literally. Words mean things.
Try changing 20 06 00 to 29 06 00 in both descriptions.Also the N 40 20 07 W should be 49 20 07
That seems to close moderately well, but not ideally.
Here's something to look at Moe.
Hold the first four courses of Deed 1 as being correct.?ÿ Hold the same four lines as perfect in Deed 2.
Let your closure problem occur at the POB for Deed !.
In Deed 2, adjust the one line from 40 plus degrees to 49 plus degrees.?ÿ Let your closure problem occur at the east end of the first call after the POB in Deed 2.
You will find the misclosure to be 16.85 feet in both cases at effectively the same bearing.
Both Holy and Bill are correct.
The old typewriter might have had an issue with the 9 and 0.?ÿ
Change the 40 to 49 on Deed #2 and change the 20 to 29 for the 20-06-00 call and everything works. I had the added resource of looking at a photo and knew the common line using the 20-06 was 80 some feet west of a fence line and the fence had a big kink in it.?ÿ
Heading out today, hopefully the crew will turn up old rebar from the survey.?ÿ
The 9 and the 0 or side by side on the keyboard.?ÿ Hitting the wrong one is a minor change in the typing process.
The pins are all there, switching the 0's to 9's correct the scrivener's error for the survey, but the two owners will need to get with the title insurance company to try and get the deeds corrected. I don't believe a Corrective Deed will be possible for Deed #2, maybe. I'm not a lawyer. Should be possible for Deed #1
A little tidbit is that the original owner was rather famous, had some major legal problems, I don't imagine that owner will be easy to include in a solution.?ÿ
There should be adjoiners who are also impacted by these mistakes.