So in the course of the research for the current farm I am working on I have found what I suspect of being a piece of property that has never been patented. I have not traced all adjoining deeds back to patent yet. I have traced all but one side back to patent. I need to trace the last side back to patent on Monday.
What are your thoughts on ethics if the surveyor would apply for a patent if in fact it has never been patented?
mattsib79, post: 394511, member: 1138 wrote: So in the course of the research for the current farm I am working on I have found what I suspect of being a piece of property that has never been patented. I have not traced all adjoining deeds back to patent yet. I have traced all but one side back to patent. I need to trace the last side back to patent on Monday.
What are your thoughts on ethics if the surveyor would apply for a patent if in fact it has never been patented?
I would inform the farmer and offer to help them patent it (for a fee) to add to the farm. Probably why I'm still poor:(
I once ran into a small (10') triangle that after much research was apparently not patented. Alerted all adjacent owners (including the County, it abutted a ROW); nobody wanted it. It was truly a useless remnant and as far as I know still unpatented land.
I am aware of one small tract for which there is no local record of it having been patented. It is a Government Lot 1 in Section XX because it is on the opposite side of the river. It was probably no more than two acres wedged between the river and the adjacent section. The land directly across the river in the same section is Lot 3 or something like that. The deeds across the river have always listed the correct Lot numbers and aliquot section parts with no mention of Lot 1.
Within the past 20 years the adjoiner was made aware of the issue. He had always assumed it was part of his land. His attorney made up a deed where the adjoiner deeded it to himself and then filed the deed. Lot 1 was included in a sale of a portion of his land earlier this year. The title company was content because they had a deed they could make reference to supporting his ownership.
I would love to see what would happen if someone were to apply to the US for a patent.
mattsib79, post: 394511, member: 1138 wrote: So in the course of the research for the current farm I am working on I have found what I suspect of being a piece of property that has never been patented. I have not traced all adjoining deeds back to patent yet. I have traced all but one side back to patent. I need to trace the last side back to patent on Monday.
What are your thoughts on ethics if the surveyor would apply for a patent if in fact it has never been patented?
Is the land occupied by your client?
Is it vacant land (not occupied by anyone)?
IF it is unoccupied (or claimed) then it is up for grabs. No "ethical" issues at all.
Have you looked at the BLM Patents site to see if they issued a patent? Instead of searching back you can search forward. Do you believe its some sort of gap in the original GLO surveys and thus was never patented?
I don't see why helping him to apply for a patent would be unethical. I think that would be helpful which is in line with a cannon of surveying, helping the good of the public.
Now, if YOU applied for the patent of the land for yourself and then turned to the farmer and tried to sell him the land....that might be a different story.
This is in Kentucky. It is all wooded. No fences no ooccupation.
I cannot speak for lands outside of Texas, but in Texas, any unpatented lands found must first be offered to adjoining landowners, or those with a legitimate interest in the land. Off the top of my head, I cannot cite the exact wording of if it is unethical or if it is defined by statute as illegal for a land surveyor to make a claim on unpatented land, but I lean toward it being illegal. A conflict of interest I know is mentioned in the rules. Again, I cannot speak for other states, sharing for infotaiment only.
I am trying to imagine how there would be unpatented land without it being illustrated on a GLO plat.
some strange things do happen with configuration when there are completion surveys after partial sections are Patented from the original township plat, but that is only a plating issue.
There are no sections. This is colonial. Gaps and overlaps are fairly common ummong patents. This is a little bit of an odd situation though. These patents were not issued in this area until 1873-1881.
I've been trying to find the citation but have been unable so far. I believe there came a point in time when all unpatented (unclaimed) property reverted to the sovereign. Patents have been issued in Oklahoma through the '50s. For some reason the year 1964 comes to mind when all unpatented land reverted to the DOI. I thought it was in the same statute that gave every Sec. 16 and Sec. 36 to the State for school lands, but I must be wrong.
A court case of AP against the US would be an interesting read.
paden cash, post: 394536, member: 20 wrote: A court case of AP against the US would be an interesting read.
I think it would be a very short read.
mattsib79, post: 394535, member: 1138 wrote: There are no sections. This is colonial. Gaps and overlaps are fairly common ummong patents. This is a little bit of an odd situation though. These patents were not issued in this area until 1873-1881.
Sounds like county court order patents. Have you checked to see if there are Old KY or Old Virginia patents that cover the area? In my area some lands were patented 2 and even 3 times. Old VA, then Old KY then county court order.
Jim Frame, post: 394537, member: 10 wrote: I think it would be a very short read.
"Denied!"
There was a certain kiwi surveyor who got himself into a little trouble when working for the then Department of Lands and Survey.
Some people came in to talk about selling a couple of very old and remote sections, still privately held, in the middle of one of our National Parks.
He bought them for himself - cost him his job and his reputation
Kevin Davis, post: 394544, member: 6918 wrote: Sounds like county court order patents. Have you checked to see if there are Old KY or Old Virginia patents that cover the area? In my area some lands were patented 2 and even 3 times. Old VA, then Old KY then county court order.
I have looked and not found any yet. All adjoining deeds reference the county court order patents and I can't find names prior to those patents.
paden cash, post: 394536, member: 20 wrote: I've been trying to find the citation but have been unable so far. I believe there came a point in time when all unpatented (unclaimed) property reverted to the sovereign. Patents have been issued in Oklahoma through the '50s. For some reason the year 1964 comes to mind when all unpatented land reverted to the DOI. I thought it was in the same statute that gave every Sec. 16 and Sec. 36 to the State for school lands, but I must be wrong.
A court case of AP against the US would be an interesting read.
Why would unpatented land revert back to the sovereign?
Unpatented land is held by the sovereign until it is patented to someone else. Seems like a useless law.
Paul in PA
Paul in PA, post: 394549, member: 236 wrote: Why would unpatented land revert back to the sovereign?
Unpatented land is held by the sovereign until it is patented to someone else. Seems like a useless law.
Paul in PA
A blanket formality at statehood since the Territory technically held some of the lands at one point in time. What would eventually become the BLM only maintained interests in mainly trust lands and eventually some spotty national forest area. Other things like unsettled homesteads that were never reconciled and surplus allotments that were never turned over to any native nation. Title can be a nightmare down here sometimes. Like I said some patents weren't actually issued until the thirties or forties on lands that were thought to be held by private native American members (allotments, not tribal sovereign soil). One branch of the US govt. said they gave it to them, but never REALLY did according to other branches.
Register of Deeds about 90 miles from here told me they had a 20 acre piece that was not patented until roughly 1950 or so. it mainly consisted of a bluff right down the middle making it pretty much worthless by itself.
