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 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.
@jim-frame If the law says you are to paid by the attorney then why are they waiting on the client??ÿ Try telling them you don't care if or when the client pays, you want your money now.?ÿ ????
@jim-frame I know what you mean about taking the rest of the day off. When I am in a deposition or testifying in a trial, I charge for a full day because i am useless the rest of the day for anything else.
@bill93?ÿ A lawyer friend of mine told me if he's sitting on the toilet and thinking about a case it's billable time.
FYI, I received payment today from the attorney -- 2 months and 1 day after it was due.
Jim: It sounds like California Government Code ??66499.53 (the next piece of?ÿ code re: Official Maps) explains what you described.
66499.53:?ÿ The engineer or surveyor, under the direction and with the approval of the city council or board of supervisors, may compile the map from maps on file, or may resurvey or renumber the blocks, or renumber or re-letter the lots in the blocks, or change the names of streets.
As the code provides for, official maps are often resurveys by the city, done to make all the various privately done tract surveys fit together, and to set street center line monuments.?ÿ In my experience, these resurveys occurred mostly pre-1900.
?ÿ
