I am trying to retrace an 1848 GLO survey, and I believe that gross error may exist.?ÿ I realize that one cannot assert gross error without a special hearing.?ÿ Have any of you seen this, and do you have any information as to what the procedure is and how to do it?
If the feds have no remaining interest they aren't likely to weigh in. Knowing the State and nature of the problem would get you more answers.
Gross errors were very common, whether they forgot by the time they got back to camp, faked meander lines (they got paid more to meander), difficulty reading their scratch board or just plain didn't give a rip. We have dashed in Section Lines as if there was no mistake and I have seen others call them Section 00. The most valuable land in the Florida Panhandle had to be resurveyed in the 1940's because the 1840 Surveyors didn't think it was worth surveying.?ÿ
Just a technicality, but it wasn't BLM if it was a 1848 GLO survey.?ÿ There is a formal process for protest and appeal, but the period of time passed from survey approval to discovery being that long, and as was said no remaining federal interest, there is little chance of pursuing a gross fraud claim at this point.?ÿ The legal precedent of the original corners location as set, would likely prevail to keep harmony in the successors of title in the subject section(s).?ÿ There is a lot of IBLA decisions and case law on gross fraud and protest/appeals of official federal surveys, should you want to review those decisions.?ÿ
Frank, what's gross error?
Honestly. Tell me. Is it 50', 100' 330' or 660'?
The reason I ask, is to know what you are talking about.
330' I've seen. 180' I've seen. And, I've seen 660'.
They are handled differently.
Thanks,
N
Gross error is a legal concept that only applies to resurvey.?ÿ No matter how screwed up the original survey is,?ÿ it controls what was patented. What happens after that is dependent on the actions of the land owners under state law?ÿ unless there is still public domain federal interest (as opposed to re-aquired federal interest).
If, on the other hand, there was fraud and the original monuments were not set as the official notes claim, BLM can assist if there is still significant federal interest in the township.?ÿ
If the boundary you are interested in is a federal interest boundary I?ÿ suggest contacting the appropriate BLM office. If it isn't, study your state's case law, or ask here for anyone who has experience with similar issues in your state.?ÿ
The term in the Manual is "gross fraud or negligence". These relate more to method and truthfulness than distance. Arguably the limits in effect at the time of the survey may be an indicator, but they certainly aren't the primary standard.?ÿ
The standard of evidence to prove gross fraud or negligence in the current Manual is "clear proof". That may work for internal policy but it does not relate to state authority surveys where no federal interest remains. In State authority surveys of private land you should look to the statutes and court rules in your State.
Right. Negligence in an original survey where land has been patented just results in wonky "squares and rectangles". There is no going back to fix things once the land has been patented, so proving negligence is a pointless exercise?ÿ
Right. Negligence in an original survey where land has been patented just results in wonky "squares and rectangles". There is no going back to fix things once the land has been patented, so proving negligence is a pointless exercise unless we are talking about a resurvey.?ÿ
