"The surveyor discovers that the entire 40-acre property is really only 38 acres. This makes the northern half of the property only 18 acres, and not 20 acres."
I'm just a lowly surveyor, but I'm suspicious the northern half of the of the property is 19 acres, not 18.?ÿ Should I suggest to the columnist that she consult with a third grade schoolteacher ??ÿ
I'm suspicious the northern half of the of the property is 19 acres, not 18.?ÿ
If it was a nominal 40 then it is probably PLSS and half would likely still be worded as an aliquot part.?ÿ Depending on the shape of the section, the 1/2 1/4 1/4 out of a 38.00 acre 1/4 1/4 might not be exactly 19.00, either.
@bill93 Per wiki the only place she could practice is probably California, and that is with an additional exam before the General Bar Exam
Taft Law School is an unaccredited, for-profit, private, and online law school in Santa Ana, California. It was founded in 1976 and operates through the Taft University System (William Howard Taft University). The school offers Juris Doctor (J.D.) and Master of Laws (LL.M.) law degree programs.
The school is not accredited by the American Bar Association nor by the State Bar of California. The Law School Admission Council lists Taft Law School as a "Non-ABA-Approved Law School" and explains that most states do not "permit graduates of these schools to take the bar examination" nor "admit to their bars a graduate of a non-ABA-approved law school."
The California State Bar Committee of Bar Examiners categorizes Taft Law School as a "registered unaccredited correspondence law school." As such, its graduates must pass the First-Year Law Students' Examination (Baby Bar) in order to be eligible to take the California General Bar Examination.
I'm suspicious the northern half of the of the property is 19 acres, not 18.?ÿ
If it was a nominal 40 then it is probably PLSS and half would likely still be worded as an aliquot part.?ÿ Depending on the shape of the section, the 1/2 1/4 1/4 out of a 38.00 acre 1/4 1/4 might not be exactly 19.00, either.
I'm aware some States require following BLM procedures when further subdividing PLSS parcels even when in private hands, but most(?) States consider PLSS land when patented no longer subject to the BLM Manual's procedures concerning further subdivision.?ÿ So if this client says he wants his 40 acres split exactly in half by acreage I'd create an E-W boundary on the mean of the North and South boundary lines and both new parcels would encompass 19.00 acres, even if the parent deed is described as a PLSS aliquot part.
Some caveats here to calm raised hackles:
If any parent parcel boundary abuts unpatented Federal Lands, Indian Reservations, military bases, etc., since there's still a Federal interest any rehabilitation of that boundary must follow the BLM Manual. Obviously reasonable.
Many(?) States that do not require adherence to BLM procedures for further subdivision require that any obliterated/lost PLSS corner be rehabilitated using BLM rules, no matter if it's an internal corner or common with adjacent private landowners.?ÿ Reasonable in that such a PLSS corner may control parcels beyond the subject parcel.
I'm a proponent of the "subdivide however you wish" once patented; Federal interest has?ÿ been extinguished and the owner should only be subject to County and Municipal strictures.
The PLSS system was designed to sell Federal lands en masse both to fill the Treasury and get land in the hands of citizens for development.?ÿ It's intent was not to limit further subdivision be in smaller squares and rectangles ad nauseum.?ÿ So once severed the Feds should get out of the way and let further subdivision be under local control.
The contrary may be shown.?ÿ If the owner says he wants to sell the SW 1/4 of his 40 acre patented parcel I'll dutifully break down the parcel using BLM procedures and acreage will be more or less.?ÿ Reasonable in flatland farming scenarios.
In reality I mostly worked in rural small parcels (<40 acres) where the owner knows exactly what he wants to sell, is surrounded by private ownership and walks me through his wishes; west of this County road to the swamp, then skirting it to to the cliff base et. al.?ÿ I've actually given a coupla rolls of flagging to owners and surveyed the dividing line they set for the new boundary.?ÿ Nothing to do with the SW16th of the NW14 blah-blah.?ÿ His PLSS patent is irrelevant except to control his original exterior boundaries.
