Pincushion professionalism?

So where are the pin finders?

> In the rules of evidence, I thought that as far as boundary law was concerned that a preponderance of evidence was needed to outweigh prima facae evidence. Finding a pin in the ground set by a surveyor is not prima facie evidence. Finding a pin in the ground set by a county or some surveyor in a official capacity such as a court appointed surveyor would be prima facie.
> Correct me if I am wrong?

Not true (at least not here).
I have an opinion from a state BLM office that held a monument of unknown origin was prima facia evidence of the corner; properly, they then proceeded to collect and analyze the evidence, and by the weight of the preponderance of the evidence they eventually rejected the monument.

For boundary surveys (resurveys/retracements), we are required to use the "best available evidence", and that "best" evidence does not have to be created by a licensed surveyor. Generally, just because some "official" set a monument during a resurvey, doesn't make it mean any more than one set by anyone else. It is the recovered evidence and the applicable laws that will count the most, not the title of the person involved.

I would have to find the case cites later tonight, but I believe that the work performed by a professional is presumed to be correct.

I didn't mean to get the thread side-tracked, but again, I don't think anyone should blindly accept any monument, nor should anyone blindly reject monuments because of who did or did not set them (they also should not be rejected soley because of a lack of record), each one should be properly analyzed.

So where are the pin finders?

I would never pull another LS's monuments unless I have permission from the LS that set them. With that said, have any of the monuments been used as a result of the seemingly bad survey? Can you call the LS that set them and outline your current scenario?

While I do not like pincushions, sometimes your hands are tied as to what you can and can't do. This may be a case where you do set your pins and merely document your findings regarding the other rebar on the face of the survey and record it. BTW I am not at all familiar with your state code and am only speaking on what I would try around here.

call kent m. He'll pull 'em.

> There is one statement in you post that jumps out at me. You say "SOME" of the owners feel the previous survey was worthless. Does that mean some of them like it? Have you called the other surveyor and discussed the problems with him? Maybe he would pull them.

You caught a pretty important needle in the haystack. It might get very interesting in a court case if the person who paid for the survey states that he would show the court the pins his surveyor set, but the other surveyor pulled them out of the ground.

I just can not bring myself to pull another surveyor's pins even if they are in the wrong location. That should be up to the surveyor that placed them or the client that paid for the erroneous work to be done.

If you were in NY or NJ I would agree with JBStahl, IF the monuments are not accepted by the landowners they are not monuments. Although I would not pull them myself but would encourage the landowner who paid for the survey to remove them. In this area it would be considered "theft of services" for anyone else to remove them.

But you are in Indiana and it appears that this is a State Statute to fix the location of a boundary, not common law. Was the survey filed with the County Surveyor? If so did any of the parties appeal the survey? If it was filed and no one appealed you/they may be stuck with the location of the boundaries as established by the 2010 survey.

I agree but after I locate the pins and set my own points, I would not pull the corners myself, I would let the owners pull them. I might make it easy for them to do so by removing them halfway but I know a surveyor who was charged with destroying property and censured by the board for pulling a pin HE had set.

So where are the pin finders?

> any monumentation found is good and you have to hold it.

Dave, I don't remember anyone advocating holding ANY monumentation as good. I think this is a case where I would NOT hold the monumentation. Only 2 years have elapsed and the landowners (some) know there is a problem. IF the monuments were set in 1910 instead of 2010, I would have to reconsider my position.

I would set new monuments, pound down the former, and kick some dirt over them.

I hate pincushions and understand so many wanting to pull the 2010 irons, but I would resist the temptation. The surveyor should be a fact finder and reporter, not the judge and jury.

Try your best to contact that surveyor and let him pull them.

Or, as silly as this may sound, set concrete monuments or pipes with large brass caps. It has been my experience that most surveyors and all land owners believe the biggest monument is the right one.

Same Company did both of these. My favorite pincushion I've run across because they are both filed section corners

So where are the pin finders?

I don't think extreme rules either way work in legal matters.

I favor using existing monumentation if at all possible because I think the law favors them too (property owners can't use imaginary points, they use real physical objects). However, obviously there are times when the rule does not apply and a new monument needs to be set.

There is a reason we have volumes and volumes full of appellate decisions opining on a nearly infinite variety of situations and that is because none of this is absolutely black and white.

I think the "legal survey" establishes the boundary unless taken up the line to the court (disputed). So once that is complete might as well jerk all the junk.

Seems like when I proposed this to the Utah legislative committee there was interest but then it went nowhere. Where was the opposition? Maybe I'll try it again as now I have a legislator that will run the bill and no need to get any committee on board.

IC 36-2-12-10

(5) The land surveyor shall present to the county surveyor for entry in the legal survey record book a plat of the legal survey and proof of notice to or waiver of notice by the adjoining landowners. The land surveyor shall give notice to adjoining landowners by registered or certified mail within ten (10) days after filing of the survey.
(c) The lines located and established under subsection (b) are binding on all landowners affected and their heirs and assigns, unless an appeal is taken under section 14 of this chapter. The right to appeal commences when the plat of the legal survey is recorded by the county surveyor in the legal survey record book.

> ... The surveyor should be a fact finder and reporter, not the judge and jury.
>

If this is true, why would we need a license to just be a fact finder and reporter? Read Cooley's dictum. We are (or at least should be) more than merely fact finders and reporters. We should be able to express a professionally formed opinion.

> Or, as silly as this may sound, set concrete monuments or pipes with large brass caps. It has been my experience that most surveyors and all land owners believe the biggest monument is the right one.

You forgot the sarcasm font!!

I think you have a bigger problem than JB Stahl and others are making it.

It sounds like, to a certain extent, you are sanctioned to do the equivalent of an 'independent resurvey' in BLM terms.

However, this is where a survey was done a couple of years ago, and has been developed (is that right?). I think there can definitely be problems if you are suddenly showing fences to be encroaching by 2', (or more?) Is it bad enough that someone's house iwill be on the wrong property?

Maybe a lot of homeowners know that the 2010 survey was "bad" but do they know how far they were to build improvements to? Of course I may not understand the problem like some of the others do, and whenever I disagree with JBS, I typically find myself wrong. But, if you have some discretion, I would advise accepting old monuments under at least certain circumstances. It would be the "plat" that would change, and not the monuments in the ground for the most parts. Of course, I don't know what will happen on the outer limits of the subdivision. Maybe hold the monument and the line it establishes and either truncate it or extend it to the senior outer boundary.

There may be areas where the land hasn't been developed yet, and/or where the owners recognized that their lot lines were wrong, and they took ownership to closer to the actual boundary. That might be some of the things you need to look at.

Am I missing something here?

> If this is true, why would we need a license to just be a fact finder and reporter? Read Cooley's dictum. We are (or at least should be) more than merely fact finders and reporters. We should be able to express a professionally formed opinion.
>
I have read it. Maybe that was not the best choices of words.
Setting your own irons would be expressing a professional opinion. I do not recall Cooley ever stating that pulling what is another surveyors professional opinion to be okay?

> You forgot the sarcasm font!!
Yes I did forget.

So where are the pin finders?

:good:

Excellent post Adam. The situation presented is anything but clear. Even if we jump to the conclusion that the poster is correct, we don't have enough information to form an opinion on some other solution. This is merely another hypothetical case of when do you destroy evidence or what makes it evidence.

I think the pins are evidence of something at this point in the narrative. I would not be pulling them or advising others to do so.

Excellent Discussion

I appreciate all of the feedback. I hadn't even considered the possibility of pulling the other surveyor's pins, as my father (an "old school" PE and LS) was very adamant about leaving other surveyor's monuments alone, no matter what our opinion about the professionalism with which they were set. However, I will probably present this as an option to our client, who is the one who paid for those to be set.

A couple of additional points that were raised by posters in this discussion:
1) The 2010 survey was not a legal survey. And it was not recorded (as is prescribed by our state code governing retracement surveys)
2) The 2010 surveyor is no longer actively practicing, does not have an active license, and does not take phone calls from other surveyors. No opportunity to discuss his survey with him is currently available. His 2010 survey had a "surveyor's report", also prescribed by Indiana code, but it had no meaningful discussion of his theory of location, nor any reference to the subdivision monuments called for in the deeds.
3) No lines of occupation are in place around the tract. The neighbor I spoke with did indicate that my client tried to build a fence based on the 2010 survey, but tried to build it on the other side of the reported "record gap" (which I previously noted does not, in fact, exist). The neighbor said that he simply went out and pulled up the fence posts every time our client put one in. I like the way he thinks 😀
4) I went to set the set the southeasterly boundary corner, which happens to lie on a Section Line, and would have had to drive my rebar through a stone (or rock?) lying between two other rebars, including one of the corners set in 2010 (see attached photo)

Exactly right JB!! Those pieces of junk are not Monuments. They are fraud. Remove them.

Pull them and set the corners

It's a tough call, at least for me.

What if the next surveyor has a copy of the 2010 plan, and he agrees with it - but now you've removed the monuments.

I know, it's hard to imagine that you might be looked upon as "that guy", by the next surveyors coming along.