@robertusa Unless the cap is marked uniquely for the corner it marks and has a date on it, it is not to identify it as an original.?ÿ Some surveyors used to mark caps with such detail but other than a few government agencies and some others monumenting or remonumenting PLSS corners, that has been the exception rather than the rule.
?ÿ
Are you saying that unless a corner is monumented with something that has been, "marked uniquely for the corner it marks and has a date on it," then you would never consider it to be an original monument of the corner?
That is a sentiment I have NEVER heard expressed and I assure you that you are not practicing surveying like any PLS I have ever followed, worked for, employed, or known.?ÿ
Are you advocating for a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard"
In the instance below the boundary was marked by stakes and posts...no mention of them having any marks at all...
30 Wash. 687, 71 P. 201 OLSON V. CITY OF SEATTLE (S. Ct. 1903).
MARTIN OLSON et ux., Respondents,
vs.
CITY OF SEATTLE, Appellant
No. 4419
SUPREME COURT OF WASHINGTON
30 Wash. 687, 71 P. 201
January 10, 1903, Decided
?ÿ
...Prior to the filing{*688}?ÿof the plat the land was regularly surveyed, and the several lots, blocks, streets and alleys into which it was divided were marked upon the ground by posts or stakes driven at the several corners thereof. Certain of these lots, among which were the lots in question in this action, as actually surveyed and marked on the ground, did not conform to the recorded plat;
that is to say, the lots in question, as actually surveyed, extended thirty feet farther west than the recorded plat showed them to extend, taking up that much of a street appearing upon the plat under the name of "Fremont Avenue."...
Where there is a discrepancy between the survey and the plat, the survey controls, when it can be ascertained, and the proof here is overwhelming that the
boundaries of the lots as claimed by and in possession of the respondents are in exact accord with the original survey. The intention of one who has platted land into lots and blocks is indicated by the monuments which he has caused to be placed, marking the boundaries of the same, and another has a right to purchase from him with reference thereto, and such monuments and boundaries cannot be changed by showing that they do not conform to a plat on file. Lots in cities and towns are not held by such a precarious tenure.
?ÿ
