The original corner will always hold (survey law 101), however, I really don't think that a re-bar can be considered original without substantial evidence to prove that it is truly the original corner in the original postion.
With that said, the line line will have an angle break at that location.
Another 2 cents worth!
Half a foot is outside the required precision here, if there is no evidence of reliance on it's position as evidenced by some improvement, I would not hold it and place a non intended kink in the line. If there was evidence of reliance, not holding it may cause no harm, depending on which side the improvement was located, a visit with both owners would be in order in any case. The common attitude of the owners around here is to not want the line kinked and some will move fences at the time and others will do it later. If there are no improvements then I would show the line straight and reference the found pin with a statement, in the also required narrative, why I did not use it. Always better to wiggle in after clearing line when marking line or make some good checks, half a foot is a big mistake, regardless of appearances the monument might have been disturbed. Set some monument once and the owner pulled some of them, when he needed one he had pulled, he carefully reset it using a transit and built a cross fence on what he thought was the line. I went out and found the pin with my cap under the fence and thought little about it until I did comps and found that the pin had moved about 30 feet. There was an angle point in his line about 30 feet back from the monument he should have used. When I set a new monument at the proper place, his comment was that he thought he had measured better than that, my comment was that he had measured from the wrong place and his measurement was close. I showed the disturbed monument and left it in place and all was explained in the narrative. Can't depend on appearance alone that a monument has not been disturbed. Surveyors, although they need to keep acquired rights in mind and recognize reliance as well as intent, do no favors to those who follow by to to quickly choosing to put kinks in lines intended to be straight.
jud
If I am interpreting what you posted correctly -
It sounds like the original subdividing surveyor ran the line out on the ground. In that case, I would hold the marker as found and place a bend in the line.
Maybe you could use statistics to put a best-fit line through the three points, and remonument all three on the statistically best-fit.
In my best Kenny Roger's voice:
"You have to know when to hold em, know when to fold 'em, know when to walk away...."
I'd hold 'em.
> Maybe you could use statistics to put a best-fit line through the three points, and remonument all three on the statistically best-fit.
I assume that is the classic tongue in cheek... 😛 Unfortunately, there are way too many surveyors that do exactly that.
Another key distinction for jud is the difference between 'precision' and 'accuracy'. That kink in the line may not be precise, but it is accurate.
$0.02
> There is NO QUESTION WHATSOEVER here. If it is indeed an original monument in the interior of the plat, you have an angle point. Positions of original monuments are ALWAYS held. This is the most fundamental principle of boundary retracement. You do not "correct" an original survey, ever. Shame on all who suggested otherwise.
Wrong! Junior monuments don't bend senior lines. It depends on whether the east line of the 5 acre lot is on the east edge of the entire subdivision.
The actions of adjacent land owners may bend the lines by reliance, acquiescense, etc., but that does not appear to have happened here.
Stephen
You haven't made clear whether the three monuments were set at the same time or not. You say the 5 acre lot is interior to the subdivision, but is the east line of it on the outer edge of the subdivision? It makes a difference.
Do the two outer monuments predate the subdivision? If so, and if they are are original and undisturbed, then a surveyor came along and accepted them and tried but failed to hit the line somewhere in the middle. If he erred by placing the capped rebar into the neighbor's property, then they automatically lose some land, right? I don't think so!!! Now fast forward a couple of decades and fences have been built and .... well, you know the drill. Then things might be different.
But if he subdivided out of a larger lot and all three monuments were part of it, then yes, the line is as marked. The line is kinked.
Stephen
Accurate only if relied upon over time and it can be shown that the monument was not set in error or that it had never moved. If no reliance and outside the precision called for in statute, intent would have a higher place in the weighing of evidence. In the data given, there is no reliance on a monument that appears undisturbed but is a half foot out of position, this monument was set during recent times when such an error would be considered a blunder or excessive.
jud
:good:
And there you have the problem with this profession, everyone has an opinion and everyone is right. then it all comes down to what a judge thinks, and what kind of day he is having when he makes a ruling??
Stephen, the original post stated that it was an original monument on an interior lot.
You are correct in the case of a monument set on an exterior boundary of the subdividing survey. Such a monument wold not represent an original survey of the adjoining line. Nevertheless, all interior monuments of the original subdividing survey hold sway in the absence of evidence that they have been moved in the intervening years.
In the case of incorrectly placed monuments purported to be on an exterior line, I would hold the monuments for line, and trim or extend the intersecting interior line to terminate at the correct exterior boundary.
> And there you have the problem with this profession, everyone has an opinion and everyone is right.
I think you just described why it is a profession. I heard a well-respected lawyer in these parts say that the surveyor makes decisions on problems that have no absolute answer. That's what distinguishes the professional from the tradesman. (or something to that effect).
> And there you have the problem with this profession, everyone has an opinion and everyone is right. then it all comes down to what a judge thinks, and what kind of day he is having when he makes a ruling??
I agree this profession is replete with, rife with, riddled with and redolent of incompetence, however, it is not a matter of one opinion vs. another. It is a matter of an opinion backed up by statute law and strong trends of case law vs. one backed up by "this is the way my Daddy taught me!"
And while it may be true that one never knows what will happen in court, that should not stop one from taking the course of action most in line with statutory law and previous court rulings. That is what will ALMOST always prevail.
Stephen
> Just show it on your plat as R & M along the true (monumented) line, and note the falling from the original platted (straight) line.
I agree, Wayne, with one exception... There is no "falling" from an imaginary platted line. The line is marked and recovered. Just make notation of the record and measured bearing and distance between the found monuments. Your measured bearings will serve as evidence for future replacement if the line monument is ever destroyed. The record bearings will reflect the straight line as "intended."
Of course, we all know that it is impossible for any of us to set the monument perfectly on the imaginary line. Only a few will admit it, though.
JBS
