A monument is the best evidence of intent.
A situation like the one you described indicates the evaluation of all available evidence, which is what we are tasked with doing.
When a surveyor throws out a recovered monument because the distance doesn't match, that is not the evaluation of all available evidence. That is not knowing boundary law.
I've heard many surveyors use a situation such as the one you just described as the basis for a decision to throw out a monument where the only evidence they've evaluated are measurements. They haven't completed the task at hand.
For Boundary, Title or Similar Surveys:
The surveyor should provide Monuments, physical or referenced, upon completion of the survey so that the boundaries and/or reference points are apparent, obvious or may be reasonably determined using the final report, map or information presented at the conclusion of the survey. If monuments are not set and/or a release from this obligation is obtained from the client, a note should be placed on the map explicitly indicating that monuments will not be placed as part of that survey. For example, the note might state that "property corner monuments were not placed as a part of this survey".
When conditions require setting a monument on an offset rather than at the true corner, the location should be selected so that the monument lies on a boundary line. Offset monuments should be noted as such on the survey map along with the offset distance to the true corner.
It is suggested that monuments set have the surveyor's name and/or license number affixed thereto. Monuments shall be witnessed in such a manner that they will be easily discoverable. Where monuments can not be physically set, corners should be referenced to existing physical features and/or be noted on the map.
:good:
Right...you have to evaluate the evidence...you can't just hold a pin that is not called for as a corner because it's there. If we have the maps and deeds that build the neighborhood out in a specific way, and we fit those deeds onto evidence in the field that works and my front corner is out by a tenth or two then it is out and we'll call it as such. This is even more true if you have original monuments (which is rare in these parts).
Tom
Additionally, each argument you have presented has been about surveying lots in a subdivision. The case you presented was 2 lots that were conveyed out of a parent tract at different times. These are different sets of facts requiring the evaluation of different sets of evidence.
Depends...If we're holding original monuments or called for monuments, that uncalled for pin that is 0.05'-0.1' out can mean the difference of a neighbor forcing another to take a fence down or move a shed at a decent cost to them. I've seen it happen more than once. When your lot is only 40 or 50 feet wide and worth a million or more, even in this market, people fight over very small amounts.
> Additionally, each argument you have presented has been about surveying lots in a subdivision. The case you presented was 2 lots that were conveyed out of a parent tract at different times. These are different sets of facts requiring the evaluation of different sets of evidence.
What about Brian Allen of Preston, Id 's, Tuesday, September 11, 2012, 10:11 post?...
"I would love to see case cites where the courts differentiate the elements of boundary law between parcels on a hillside and parcels in cities."
Wait, I'm confused. 😉
Where's Mr. Keith and his contribution to this grand surveying discussion?
Great job guys! Keep it coming.
In a historical subdivision where you have no original monuments and a map/deed call for 50x100 lots and you locate 20+ pins on a block with 20+ ways of fitting the block dimensions to the evidence...what do you pick? Every pin set is from a re-survey. There may have been 10+ surveyors who set those pins based on how they fit the properties to the evidence they found. If we have 10 pins around us that work pretty damn good (less than 0.05' or so) and it puts that front pin out by a tenth than I call that out.
If in a modern subdivision we have 100 lots and only 4 or 5 original monuments scattered around. They all miss each other but a few hundredths or even a tenth or more, etc you still have to fit the mapping to those original monuments as best you can (depending on how they are scattered you can't always prorate, etc)...if that puts the pin in front of my lot out by 3 tenths because someone didn't locate all the original monuments, then it is out.
I'm not saying to just hold deeds or maps. But they plan a crucial role in evidence especially when dealing with uncalled for and unoriginal monuments. You have to consider all evidence.
Since I seem to be getting beat up here let me clarify my position...you have to look at all evidence and the situation you are in. If the situation arises where a tenth can matter in a boundary dispute and you have evidence through original monuments and/or original mapping/deeds, you may have to call out that uncalled for and/or unoriginal monument in your front corner. You can't survey strictly by monuments just as you can't survey strictly by deeds.
If I'm in an urban situation where the maps call out 100.00 feet and we have good evidence to fit the map in a way that puts an uncalled for pin in my front corner out by a tenth I'm going to call it out. If I'm in the back woods upstate and the deed calls out 100' to a stone wall and I find a pin in a stone wall that is 100.25', I'll probably hold that pin.
Where does this come from? Can you please show me something that says that if you have a monument (called for, not called for, any monument) that is out a tenth that is "out"? That sounds ridiculous, even more so when you consider that the monument you find there that you are calling "out" was set by another professional.
The problem here is that the only evidence you are evaluating are measurements. That is not evaluating all available evidence. Measurement differences indicate only that, a difference in measurement.
There is a rule of law that applies to EVERY situation. We are tasked with figuring out which rule applies and how.
It seems absurd to me to call another surveyor's monument "out" because a corner of your geometric figure in AutoCAD misses the coordinate you measured on that existing monument by a tenth. It will continue to be absurd until a court of law says that a tenth is too much.
I think I am getting a headache!
For crying out loud, just got up, on my first cup of coffee, and have never read more bull#### in any thread!
First, anybody using accuracy standards for acceptance of corner monuments, should not be surveying!
Second, anybody that does not know the ranking of evidence, should not be surveying!
Third, go back and read the First and Second.
Sheesh!!!
Keith
Because if a monument is not called for or original it may not be controlling evidence...especially if there is other evidence (field or deed/map) that supports something else.
If that was the case then the pin in that dispute I talked about should have held. You have no evidence to say that it was even set by a surveyor or that if it was that the surveyors work was correct.
And again, if that tenth means someone has to take down a $5,000 fence or a $10,000 wall, it matters a lot.
I think I am getting a headache!
:good:
:good: :good: :good:
B-)
> You have no evidence to say that it was even set by a surveyor or that if it was that the surveyors work was correct.
That is a presumption that you have to overcome. Proof otherwise does not consist of 0.10' measurement difference.
You are mixing apples and oranges here. The case you cited was a case of senior rights. Measurement differences in a subdivision are not the same thing.
I think I am getting a headache!
You think YOU have a headache????!!!!!???
Come to Manhattan and try to make all the lots fit when you're building a 50 or 60 story tower.
Math and measurements are intended to dictate where an original surveyor is "supposed" to set the monument; they don't dictate where a retracing surveyor "recovers" the monument.
>"The original survey in all cases must, whenever possible, be retraced, since it cannot be disregarded or needlessly altered after property rights have been acquired in reliance upon it. On a resurvey to establish lost boundaries, if the original corners can be found, the places where they were originally established are conclusive without regard to whether they were in fact correctly located, in this respect it has been stated that the rule is based on the premise that the stability of boundary lines is more important than minor inaccuracies or mistakes. But it has also been said that great caution must be used in reference to resurveys, since surveys made by different surveyors seldom wholly agree. Adams v. Hoover, 493 N.W.2d 280 (MI 1992)
>
In the examples given, I don't see any claim that original monuments have been recovered. When they're not discoverable, it's time to concern ourselves with the "stability of boundary lines" above our concern for measurements.
JBS
