Simple conveyance question

I would survey it as you describe if the evidence supported it. I wouldn't change the description without a VERY good reason...

I would definitely look at the adjoiners deeds and signs of occupation or any old survey tracks.

That is one of the conundrums we face all too often. We know what it SHOULD be but is that what was INTENDED? I've seen many deeds for the south 30 feet and the north 20 feet of a 50 foot lot. It doesn't matter what the relative angle may be, they intended to measure along the lot line a specific number because later they would sell the remainder using the second term as above rather than saying Lot X less the south 30 feet thereof. Now expand that out to a full quarter section. That is why you must research all nearby deeds as well. Sometimes the difference between the two potential lines can be quite significant. Then, you may be able to notice physical clues as to the intent. This becomes more true as the age of the original deed using such words gets older. They had no idea what the angle was or how that would impact the words they were writing. Just because it is easy for us today with the technology we have available does not mean they intended a perfect parallel situation.

One of my challenges many years ago involved deeds for something like the west 33 acres and the east 47 acres of the north half of the northwest quarter of a section. There were 83 or 84 acres, not 80.

Do it correctly.

Then show the deed distances perpendicular to the aliquot lines on your survey along with the boundary line distances as you calculate them.

> Do it correctly.
But what is correct? It seems to me the PLS is instructing with his opinion of correct and he is ultimately the person signing the work. BTW I tend to agree with the instructions given. When the division was conceived, nobody was thinking of parallelograms, they would have pulled the distances along the lines and connected the dots.

The boundary is what it is, 300.20' across the front, or whatever.

I would also show a dimension of 300.00', across the interior, perpendicular, because at that point the distance is 300.00'

I assumed it was a layperson, not a PLS instructing him.

We do not agree on the solution, and that's OK. I would make the line 300.00 and the perpendicular 299.8 or whatever it turned out to be.

The key to a correct answer lies in the question. 'How would you calculate. ..'.
I would assume he means in preparation for a survey (big assumption).
If a survey gives no clear possession or evidence then we must rely on intent. Intent as it relates to real property should be construed as 'what does the evidence and record say they did' as opposed to the 'what did they mean'.
With no on the ground evidence being recovered, the creation of the parcel must be considered. Construction against the creating grantor would be a good first solution to consider. If unclear it may require an agreement between the parties. Whatever you do, leave the Quit Claim Deeds in the drawer. Those awful (and universally abused) monstrosities have no place in this issue...

Well Mich, having been in your shoes in MI for many years, I would tend to break down the section, make sure you set the deed calls and then move on.

Not sure what county you're in, but a call to the county surveyor will help. They are our allies, not the bad guys!!!! Check that, I'd call them first before I set foot on the property. just sayin'....

You can check deeds all day long and you will just lose sleep wondering on a WTF do I do. Call the county, they are your friends.

Hope you got a retainer..... 😉

> We do not agree on the solution, and that's OK. I would make the line 300.00 and the perpendicular 299.8 or whatever it turned out to be.

But, that would be the North 299.8, not the north 300

I agree it's not that much, but it is incorrect.