Way back 40-60 years ago a 60 foot ingress/egress, utilities easement was created adjacent to the mobile section line I have posted about before. I could look it up but the date is not important relative to the following question.
In early October I met the adjoining land owner on site and we came to an agreement that the monuments are not original and apparently have legs. We also agreed to a best-fit line of the fence to be designated "PROPERTY LINE" on my survey. From recorded surveys I can also designate two separate "SECTION LINE"(s) on my survey, one of which I am 99.9% confident is just wrong.
Anyway, now the question. In your professional opinion, would the easement be attached to the other "SECTION LINE", or would you move it to the "PROPERTY LINE"? The two lines are separated by 30 feet one end to 55 feet at the other. A farm path running generally along the fence will go outside either choice at one end or the other.
I would "attach" the easement to the best evidence of its original location. From what I've gleaned from your post, I believe that would be the property line.
More reference on a similar instance:
Johnson v. Westrick - 85 Wis. 80,55 N.W. 177 (1893)
> Way back 40-60 years ago a 60 foot ingress/egress, utilities easement was created adjacent to the mobile section line I have posted about before. I could look it up but the date is not important relative to the following question.
>
> In early October I met the adjoining land owner on site and we came to an agreement that the monuments are not original and apparently have legs. We also agreed to a best-fit line of the fence to be designated "PROPERTY LINE" on my survey. From recorded surveys I can also designate two separate "SECTION LINE"(s) on my survey, one of which I am 99.9% confident is just wrong.
>
> Anyway, now the question. In your professional opinion, would the easement be attached to the other "SECTION LINE", or would you move it to the "PROPERTY LINE"? The two lines are separated by 30 feet one end to 55 feet at the other. A farm path running generally along the fence will go outside either choice at one end or the other.
Do you have any belief that the fence/agreement line is evidence of the original section line? Or, do you believe the fence/agreement line was believed by creators of the easement to be the location of the section line so called for therein? If no to either, then I would tend to think that establishment, or re-establishment of the section line would also establish the location of the easement.
Am curious if in your state, your survey constitutes creation of an adjustment in boundary location from the section line to the agreement location? Or do deeds or local agency re-platting process also have to come into play?
Regardless, if the agreement line is going to fix location of title, then would there be opposition to quit claiming the old easement and recording a new easement to reflect the agreement location?
> Do you have any belief that the fence/agreement line is evidence of the original section line? Or, do you believe the fence/agreement line was believed by creators of the easement to be the location of the section line so called for therein? If no to either, then I would tend to think that establishment, or re-establishment of the section line would also establish the location of the easement.
>
I actually do believe the fence is the best representation of the original section line but I can't prove it. People have been moving and removing monuments in the area for many years.
> Am curious if in your state, your survey constitutes creation of an adjustment in boundary location from the section line to the agreement location? Or do deeds or local agency re-platting process also have to come into play?
>
It is all PLSS legal descriptions so I believe we are free and clear of the county influence
> Regardless, if the agreement line is going to fix location of title, then would there be opposition to quit claiming the old easement and recording a new easement to reflect the agreement location?
>
This is an excellent idea because the road meanders a bit to get around a pond. The problem with the idea is that people who have no interest in the actual property benefit from the easement and it is attached to deeds of property that are a mile or more away.
> This is an excellent idea because the road meanders a bit to get around a pond. The problem with the idea is that people who have no interest in the actual property benefit from the easement and it is attached to deeds of property that are a mile or more away.
I really don't see the "problem". You have apparently been skillful and successful in solving the location of the boundary line to the satisfaction of the landowners. Keep going, help all involved to solve the easement "problem" now to prevent future litigation. All they can do is tell you no.
> > Am curious if in your state, your survey constitutes creation of an adjustment in boundary location from the section line to the agreement location? Or do deeds or local agency re-platting process also have to come into play?
> >
>
> It is all PLSS legal descriptions so I believe we are free and clear of the county influence
>
Its actually the first part of my question that I'm curious about. In the area I practice, your situation would fall into one of a few catagories:
If simply addressed through a record of survey, this would only be the issuance of an opinion as to the status of boundary location. In your case, the showing of an agreement line would need to be accompanied by a determination that the true section line/boundary is indeterminable, and there would need to be statements of the agreement signed by both owners and notorized and recorded to enter into the chain of title. In this case the easement location would be indeterminate and would best be served by involving all interested parties to eliminate future claims as to its location
Or, alternatively if simply addressed through a record of survey, this might be addressed as an opinion that the best fit fence line is the best available evidence of the section line. This opinion (record of survey) would need to include statements of why the other 2 possible section line alternatives are not accepted as part of your opinion. Also, the best fit fence line would not be referred to as an agreement line. In this case, you will have opined on both the boundary and easement location.
Or, alternatively, the area could be re-platted through our state's subdivision process, thereby creating a new boundary and erasing old boundaries. In this case, private easements need to be quit-claimed and re-granted to the new location.
Or, alternatively, a lot line adjustment could be undertaken through our state's exemption to the subdivision process. Again, the easement would still need to be quit-claimed and re-granted to the new location.
The last 2 options require local agency involvement.
Your state's laws will likely address this situation differently. I'm only passing along how I would be required to address it in the state I practice in. Hopefully this may give some insight as how to address the situation in the jursidiction you practice in.
> Its actually the first part of my question that I'm curious about. In the area I practice, your situation would fall into one of a few catagories:
>
> Your state's laws will likely address this situation differently. I'm only passing along how I would be required to address it in the state I practice in. Hopefully this may give some insight as how to address the situation in the jursidiction you practice in.
And in which State do you practice?