What happens when the ground moves?

[MEDIA=youtube]xs_bkhqJmRI[/MEDIA]

In California, the Cullen Act was enacted in 1972 in response to the Sylmar earthquake. That event shifted many blocks in northern Los Angeles.

CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
CHAPTER 3.6. Cullen Earthquake Act [751.50 - 751.65] ( Chapter 3.6 added by Stats. 1972, Ch. 936. )

751.50.

If the boundaries of land owned either by public or by private entities have been disturbed by earth movements such as, but not limited to, slides, subsidence, lateral or vertical displacements or similar disasters caused by man, or by earthquake or other acts of God, so that such lands are in a location different from that at which they were located prior to the disaster, an action in rem may be brought to equitably reestablish boundaries and to quiet title to land within the boundaries so reestablished.

As Warren mentioned above, the Cullen Act was enacted in 1972. However, the courts ruled in Andrea JOANNOU et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants, v. CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES et al.,Defendants and Respondents http://caselaw.findlaw.com/ca-court-of-appeal/1644364.html , which involved a slow moving landslide, that the Cullen Act did not apply. Sort of like erosion versus avulsion. I believe there is another in case in San Francisco involving a slide where the courts decided differently (Cullen Act did apply), but I do not recall the specifics. So, with regards to the location of parcel boundaries being altered as a result of the ground moving, it depends, as far as the courts are concerned, dependent on what the nature of the cause was.

Here is a series of papers by C. Albert White, Land Slide Report that cover sudden shifts in Oregon, Wyoming and Idaho; creeping shifts in Washington and Utah; and earthquake shifts in Alaska and California.

The California example is the Sylmar Earthquake Resurvey that Warren posted the statute. It includes the 4-sheet record of survey that is the case that Tracie Linn Mesloh presented in her thesis. C. Albert White is a bit dismissive of the Cullen Act stating, "The Cullen Act is simple, as shown in Exhibit A, and gives no guidance to the land surveyor". Ouch.

Gene Kooper, post: 429898, member: 9850 wrote:
The California example is the Sylmar Earthquake Resurvey that Warren posted the statute. It includes the 4-sheet record of survey that is the case that Tracie Linn Mesloh presented in her thesis. C. Albert White is a bit dismissive of the Cullen Act stating, "The Cullen Act is simple, as shown in Exhibit A, and gives no guidance to the land surveyor". Ouch.

That would be true. It is guidance for attorneys to file an in rem action for quiet title. The exhibits would be prepared by a land surveyor, and proper foundation (so to speak) laid by counsel.

I have always been curious about what the result would be when a structure were to "move across the line".
It does happen, but I have only seen cases where the structure was not salvageable.
perhaps the only method is the "in rem action for quiet title"

Warren Smith, post: 429899, member: 9900 wrote: That would be true. It is guidance for attorneys to file an in rem action for quiet title. The exhibits would be prepared by a land surveyor, and proper foundation (so to speak) laid by counsel.

I see what you did there. 🙂

Peter Ehlert, post: 429901, member: 60 wrote: I have always been curious about what the result would be when a structure were to "move across the line".
It does happen, but I have only seen cases where the structure was not salvageable.
perhaps the only method is the "in rem action for quiet title"

There were a couple of threads that discussed your question in September 2012. The situation was different than the sudden movement of the PCH 1 landslide. The home had slowly moved down slope over time.

Who owns what and where?

This lady should've got a survey before purchase...

IIRC the prevailing opinion was that the corners should "move" with the monuments and homes.