Okay, thanks. ?ÿNo more screen shots. ?ÿI realize there is a time zone difference, but I tried it several times during the day.
My favorite TV channel is C-Span. ?ÿI am trying to enjoy Court TV, but the talking heads get in the way. ?ÿI just enjoy raw unedited American government working at its best (or at least at the best it can do at the moment).
Weird, I know. ?ÿSue me.
That is the proper expression of disgust that the opposing counsel should have after 2hrs with a diligent licensed surveyor.
Sounds like you got his goat and left him with squat to take away from the table.
kuddos
No kudos earned until we see what the judge says.?ÿ 🙂
While it is potentially humorous and entertaining to see incompetent performance by attorneys, it can have unintended bad consequences for everyone, including surveyors.?ÿ The premise of our advocate-based justice system is that there is competent representation on both sides.?ÿ Courts and judges can only rule on the arguments and evidence presented.?ÿ Appeal courts do not admit new arguments and evidence, it is a rehearing of the same case.?ÿ The "correct" position that is not properly argued and supported with evidence can very well be ruled against (and not overturned on appeal).?ÿ Rulings against the "correct" position are unfortunate for those individuals who suffer the loss, but it can have broader impacts on other cases (and surveyors operating under that case law).
?ÿ
I know nothing of the quality of the arguments and evidence in Bailey vs. Parker but it appeared to be a case that the circuit court got "wrong" (holding a bearing over a natural monument like a creek).?ÿ The ruling was of such concern that PLSO submitted an amicus brief in the appeal process!?ÿ You can read the unfolding of the case here in a series of Oregon Surveyor Magazines (the second link, July/August has the bulk of the information).?ÿ
http://associationpublications.com/flipbooks/plso/2017/MayJune/index.html
http://www.associationpublications.com/flipbooks/plso/2017/JulyAugust/index.html
http://associationpublications.com/flipbooks/plso/2017/NovDec/4/
http://associationpublications.com/flipbooks/plso/2018/JanFeb/index.html
?ÿ
This does bring up the larger issue (maybe for another thread) of how does someone hire a good [profession/trade] person??ÿ Most people have no way to determine how to hire a good surveyor, lawyer, etc or electrician, plumber, etc.?ÿ Consumer reviews mostly pertain to customer service (are they responsive to phone calls, are they on time for appointments, etc). ?ÿ
?ÿ
The courts making the "correct" rulings helps everyone which doesn't always happen when there is no competent effort to present the correct arguments and evidence.?ÿ Courts making random or inconsistent or conflicting rulings due to poor arguments and poor evidence is just begging for a long messy appeals process that may also be a roll of the dice based on poor inputs, certainly not stability upon which people can rely!?ÿ
?ÿ
?ÿRulings against the "correct" position are unfortunate for those individuals who suffer the loss, but it can have broader impacts on other cases (and surveyors operating under that case law).
Only appealed cases generate case law. In the appeal decision, legal principles may be set, strengthened, or weakened, but the quality of evidence presented isn't going to have much effect on those principles and thus on later cases.
I've been very much aware of this during the course of this trial and its lead-up.?ÿ While I don't think the plaintiff's surveyor is right -- he marked a boundary line based solely on plat and deed dimensions, ignoring 120-year-old occupation evidence that's supported by Official Map dimensions -- I've kind of felt sorry for the plaintiff for having picked such a lackluster attorney.?ÿ The guy representing my client, on the other hand, has been doing a great job.?ÿ The decision could go either way, but based on the questions the judge asked I think he's leaning in our direction.
@jitterboogie, pigs are actually not the slobs people generally think, unless confined.?ÿ Given room in their quarters, they will select an area for elimination and will not roll around in their waste.?ÿ Of course, one of their favorite pastimes is rooting around in the soil for whatever then can find.?ÿ As a result they make the pastures and lots where they are kept look less than tidy.?ÿ It is when hogs are confined, as are most commercial pork farms these days, that they may be found rolling in their own excrement.
True.?ÿ Given the opportunity they will pick a spot and then avoid that spot.?ÿ That his how flushing gutters came to be added to confined swine housing.?ÿ The pigs all do their thing in the gutter area, then at some time a large quantity of water (reused water) comes flushing down the gutter and carries it all away.
True and fair. I didnt intend to besmirch swine, as they are quite intelligent and social stigmas as they are, added my poignant relief directed at the intended target of opportunity.
?ÿ???? ???? ?ÿ
...Official Map...
What is this?
California Government Code ??66499.52(a):
Whenever any city, town or subdivision of land is platted or divided into lots or blocks, and whenever any addition to any city, town or subdivision is laid out into lots or blocks for the purpose of sale or transfer, the city engineer or the county surveyor, under the direction and with the approval of the city council or board of supervisors, may make an official map of the city, town or subdivision, giving to each block on the map a number, and to each lot or subdivision in the block a separate number or letter, and giving names to the streets, avenues, lanes, courts, commons or parks, as may be delineated on the official map.
Official Maps are valid for use in title transfer.
I'm not sure if the status of Official Maps that were prepared prior to the language of the current Code have exactly the same status as those that were, but I do know of older Official Maps that are regularly used as a reference in title conveyances.?ÿ In the case at hand, the Official Maps are from 1915 and 1926, were compiled by the City Engineer "from plats of filed and recorded surveys and from relocation surveys," and were signed by the city's Board of Trustees.
?ÿ
Official Map No. 2, Pages 1 to 42, circa 1932, is the area I used to do a lot of surveying.?ÿ Currently known as La Habra Heights and La Habra.
It is a subdivision of a portion of the Rancho La Habra and was actually surveyed by the County Surveyor over a period of sixteen years.?ÿ Many of their original 2" I.P.'s are there to this day.
@jim-frame?ÿ Odd... sounds like a subdivision plat except the map somehow comes after the lot and blocks are laid out?
I don't have an authoritative source, but I get the impression that Official Maps were born of a desire to formally acknowledge a town's development pattern in a manner that can be used for title transfer when the history of the lot configurations wasn't always clear.?ÿ
The matter on which I testified is a case in point:?ÿ the original 1876 plat showed my client's north line being 415.5 feet from the block corner, but the 1915 and 1926 Official Maps show that distance as 421 feet.?ÿ (The block line locations aren't in dispute.)?ÿ That distance is supported graphically by the Sanborn fire maps from 1889, 1895 and 1908, which show the houses (still present) built in 1895 and 1904.?ÿ I held the old fence line between the houses as the lot line, which puts the distance to the block corner within half a foot of that 421-foot distance.?ÿ The other surveyor held 415.5 feet, which puts the line about 6.5 feet from my client's house, effectively obliterating his driveway to the garage in the back.?ÿ The judge asked a lot of good questions (this was a bench trial, no jury present) about the various maps, so I'm hopeful that he'll rule in my client's favor.
@jim-frame nice summary, thanks. ?ÿPlease keep us posted. ?ÿI assume that at least your client is spending a lot of money for professional support services for you, his attorney, etc. in order to maintain clear legal use and access to his driveway and garage. ?ÿThis would be a stressful situation for me as a land surveyor. ?ÿI have avoided confrontation for fifty years so far, sometimes to a fault.
Spent time this morning with two attorneys and discussed widely diverging issues with each in his private office.?ÿ Both are what I call "good" lawyers.?ÿ They know what they know and the pretty well know what they don't know.?ÿ That's where I come in.
One has his bachelor degree from Silo Tech and his J.D. from Snob Hill, so he has to dislike himself immensely.
The saga continues.
California law requires that a deponent be paid by the deposing attorney prior to or at the beginning of the deposition, with any amounts beyond the anticipated length of the deposition to be paid within 5 days of receipt of invoice.?ÿ Since this deposition was remote (via Zoom), I emailed my invoice the same day of the deposition (11/24/20).?ÿ In the email I asked for confirmation of receipt, but got none.
On 12/17/20 I sent a paper invoice by First Class mail.?ÿ No response.
On 01/13/21 I sent email with another copy of the invoice and a draft of a State Bar complaint, stating that I would file the complaint if payment was not received within 5 business days.?ÿ That elicited an email response from the attorney's staff:
Good morning Mr. Frame,
I spoke to our client this morning, and he is mailing a check to our office today. As soon as it is
received we will send you a check to pay your invoice. Thank you.
On 01/21/20, having not received payment or any further correspondence, I filed the complaint with the State Bar.
And meanwhile, I suppose the lawyer charged his client a quarter hour for reading each of your emails and letters.
@jim-frame the bastards.?ÿ Give them hell!
Jim you know we are all vicariously participating in this struggle for payment. Please keep us informed of the plight of the attorney. We will all enjoy it.