Here's a metes and bounds description from a deed executed in 1878 by which a certain 72 acre tract of land was conveyed out of a larger tract that extended on both sides of Bear Creek, a tract that is now on the outskirts of Austin:
Beginning in bed of Bear Creek;
1) Thence North 1330 vs. to Northeast corner of J. M. Hodge tract;
2) Thence West 510 vs. to corner in bed of Bear Creek;
3)Thence down the same to corner in same about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek;
4) Thence South 38 East 560 vs. to the beginning;
Containing 72 acres of land more or
less.
The question is a simple one, namely: "Does course No.4 follow Bear Creek?"
It really doesn't matter. Six other of your brethren have stacked up rocks and driven axles in the ground at various locations as much as 100 varas distant from the creek over the years. We all know you're going to set your own new monument anyway and proclaim victory by mental superiority...;)
paden cash, post: 437445, member: 20 wrote: It really doesn't matter. Six other of your brethren have stacked up rocks and driven axles in the ground at various locations as much as 100 varas distant from the creek over the years. We all know you're going to set your own new monument anyway and proclaim victory by mental superiority...;)
For God's sake Paden; give the man an answer so he can reveal the pertinent withheld information whilst calling you an ill-educated PLSS cookbook jockey.
paden cash, post: 437445, member: 20 wrote: It really doesn't matter. Six other of your brethren have stacked up rocks and driven axles in the ground at various locations as much as 100 varas distant from the creek over the years. We all know you're going to set your own new monument anyway and proclaim victory by mental superiority...
It gets better. The location of the segment of the boundary described by Course No. 4 was the subject of bitter dispute between the adjoining landowners for years, The owner of the tract North of the creek claiming that the boundary was the centerline of the creek and the owner of the tract to the South claiming that the boundary was a straight line that veered well North of the creek.
Kent McMillan, post: 437430, member: 3 wrote: Here's a metes and bounds description from a deed executed in 1878 by which a certain 72 acre tract of land was conveyed out of a larger tract that extended on both sides of Bear Creek, a tract that is now on the outskirts of Austin:
Beginning in bed of Bear Creek;
1) Thence North 1330 vs. to Northeast corner of J. M. Hodge tract;
2) Thence West 510 vs. to corner in bed of Bear Creek;
3)Thence down the same to corner in same about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek;
4) Thence South 38 East 560 vs. to the beginning;
Containing 72 acres of land more or
less.The question is a simple one, namely: "Does course No.4 follow Bear Creek?"
Is Little Bear Creek and Bear Creek the same Creek?
James Fleming, post: 437447, member: 136 wrote: For God's sake Paden; give the man an answer so he can reveal the pertinent withheld information whilst calling you an ill-educated PLSS cookbook jockey.
Believe it or not, the facts as presented were unquestionably sufficient to answer the question. :>
Scott Ellis, post: 437450, member: 7154 wrote: Is Little Bear Creek and Bear Creek the same Creek?
Little Bear Creek is a tributary branch of Bear Creek.
Kent McMillan, post: 437452, member: 3 wrote: Believe it or not, the facts as presented were unquestionably sufficient to answer the question. :>
Sounds like the descending opinion by the northern adjoiner is a case of "seeing only what one wishes to see"...a not so rare malady in Tejas probably borne in bad mole or pico de gallo.
It might get interesting if you ever get a chance to bestow your virtuous knowledge upon this party...I'm sure they would be just as receptive to the opinions of others as anybody else that lives down there. 😉
3)Thence down the creek to corner in the creek about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek;
I can only see this one way...down the creek, unless the creek decided to move its location one night while no one was looking.
John Evers, post: 437455, member: 467 wrote: 3)Thence down the creek to corner in the creek about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek;
I can only see this one way...down the creek, unless the creek decided to move its location one night while no one was looking.
In PLSS states the words "along" a senior line can be construed as a mere direction as opposed to "on" a senior line. I'll have to check my cookbook though.
paden cash, post: 437454, member: 20 wrote: It might get interesting if you ever get a chance to bestow your virtuous knowledge upon this party...
Well, I took a look in the "cookbook" we use in Texas that consists of the entire body of Texas statues and case law. The reason why I say that the facts are unquestionably sufficient is that the Texas Supreme Court decided the question in Hejl v. Wirth, a landmark boundary case, based upon the description as presented.
John Evers, post: 437455, member: 467 wrote: 3)Thence down the creek to corner in the creek about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek;
I can only see this one way...down the creek, unless the creek decided to move its location one night while no one was looking.
Yes Course No. 3 is clearly a meander call that runs with the centerline of the creek. The question was whether Course No. 4 that began at a point in the creek and terminated at a point in the creek was also a meander line.
Nope. Straight line from the end of course 3 to the POB. Nothing in course 4 infers or explicitly states that the intent was to follow the creek, as opposed to the previous courses (2 & 3), where clearly the author intended the creek to control.
Unless the contrary can be shown, of course. 😉
SPMPLS, post: 437460, member: 11785 wrote: Nope. Straight line from the end of course 3 to the POB. Nothing in course 4 infers or explicitly states that the intent was to follow the creek, as opposed to the previous courses (2 & 3), where clearly the author intended the creek to control.
The landowner to the North was relying upon the fact that Course No. 4 began and terminated at points in Bear Creek, which, if considered alone would make it a meander call. As the Supreme Court pointed out, though, if the intention was to follow Bear Creek from the beginning of Course No. 3 to the POB, the recital of the "corner" about 40 varas below the mouth of Little Bear Creek served no purpose.
The wording "below the mouth of Little Bear Creek" tells me that it went downstream about 40 varas past the mouth of Little Bear Creek.
A Harris, post: 437571, member: 81 wrote: The wording "below the mouth of Little Bear Creek" tells me that it went downstream about 40 varas past the mouth of Little Bear Creek.
Yes, that's exactly how I understand that phrase as well. The boundary followed the meanders of the centerline of Bear Creek to a point that was 40 varas distant in a downstream direction from where the centerline of Little Bear Creek intersected that of Bear Creek.
It was one thing for the Supreme Court to decide the question of whether Course No. 4 was a meander call or a straight line connecting the two endpoints described, but quite another for the actual adjudicated line to be put on the ground when the matter was returned to the District Court from which it originated. There were at least three different surveys made, no two of which agreed with each other, mostly because the POB was quite difficult to locate on the ground for various reasons, not the least of which being that it was the point where a line run in 1841 that itself was in dispute intersected the centerline of Bear Creek.
So...like everything else in Texas, a well defined term like "meander line" means something entirely different that it does in the civilized world.
Your description appears (to me) to describe the "thread" or "thalweg" of the river/stream/creek, whereas a "meander line" by definition describes the limit/bank/etc. of a stream/river/creek/etc.
No wonder surveying in Texas is so complicated (to YOU anyway).
:confused:
Loyal
BTW, on the subject of meander lines, probably the most cited case on the subject in Texas law is the 1912 matter of Dutton v. Vierling (152 SW 450) in which the Appeals Court reversed the decision of the trial court on appeal and then reversed its own decision.
Loyal, post: 437583, member: 228 wrote: So...like everything else in Texas, a well defined term like "meander line" means something entirely different that it does in the civilized world.
I'm sure that we all await any evidence that PLSSia is civilized. I'd understood from you that it's mostly a bunch of surveyors living in their trucks in the desert.
Kent McMillan, post: 437587, member: 3 wrote: I'm sure that we all await any evidence that PLSSia is civilized. I'd understood from you that it's mostly a bunch of surveyors living in their trucks in the desert.
Nice try...
