The act of a licensed surveyor, acting in good faith, referring to the applicable deed, absent of fraud, setting a monument that meets applicable statutes, constitutes the establishment of a Legal property corner, which is something that lies on the ground and not in a computer or in the head of a future surveyor. A pincushions does not invalidate the first survey, it does the opposite, it causes a legal problem that did not exist previously.?ÿ
We can not give merit to the notion of telling our client "the pin I set is not your property corner. The pin that some guy in the future sets near this pin will be your property corner whenever that is"
I know it is virtually impossible to avoid. However, I have come to regret setting all but maybe 2 of my own pincushions.?ÿ
A boundary is a legal entity, it is not a mathematical or geometric entity. So you come to a line monument which is off some small amount, is it perfectly stable in location and how big is your 95% error ellipse, what direction is it oriented?
I came to a freshly set rebar on a section line, 2' north (our Forest is south, private north). So I called the pre-1982 CE because I figured his client didn't necessarily want to donate 2' to the State. The issue arose because a mid-1960s civil engineering firm R/S on the west half of the mile was based in old less accurate record information but in his defense that wasn't terribly clear on the face of the survey he used. So I called that one off. I surveyed from the section corner on the west (not done in the 1960s) to the quarter section corner to the section corner on the east (the 1960s engineer did Survey the east half of the line).
While that makes sense, what about the concept of reliance by the property owners?
Suppose none of the owners ever did anything that used the first pin, maybe never even saw it, and you come along and find the other guy set it at 101.02 (probably measured with a blunder chaining from only one side) to mark "half" of a lot you measured 101.02 + 99.05 = 200.07
Would you accept it?
Would you say it didn't meet the statutes and replace it?
Would you say it met the statutes, but was still wrong and replace it?
Other?
I can think of twicw where I set the the correct position, and explained on my plat that with vacant land and no improvements, equal acreage it would do no harm. One was an original pin out by 13 feet on a 100' line. The landowner who 'lost' due to the correct position sued, and won. Case law. See CAMB v Morales Colorado. I still try to fix a subdivision if it does no harm, very tempting
