Which deed do I refer to?

If the most recent deed fully describes the parcel and all relevant easements and the chain can be readily followed from it, that is sufficient. However if a pertinent easement and/or exception has been dropped from recent deeds you go as far back in the chain to reference it and bring it forward. That also is done if a filed map reference has been dropped.

In addition I may find that field evidence is verified by reference to adjacent deeds, especially if I am not agreeing with prior metes and or bounds.

Paul in PA

Try 'Parcel created by Warranty Deed X and later described in Deed y, z, etc...'

I've had to pull the original(digital still way behind in Park county) recorded documents from the 1860s. This was to begin research for land that had been originally mining claims, patented, then sold off and resurveyed into residential lots only to be lost in the vast morass of incompetence/neglect/carelessness/lack of understanding that has plagued the county for generations. Took 10s of hours.?ÿ I worked for the county. I was on a mission. and Hourly.?ÿ ;)?ÿ ?ÿ

Sometimes you go as far back as possible, just to figure out whence it came, especially if it doesn't seem to tie out to the current and or recent documents.?ÿ my $0.02....

I always use the most current deed for an ALTA or a Subdivision Plat, In Texas the Survey is really made for another Surveyor to be able to read and understand it, as long as there is some recording information for the tract then the other Surveyor can take it from there. I do always try to use the most current deed, I may pull and plot the tract up from the first deed or maybe the 4th deed in the chain, but always try to show the newest recorded deed.

I have gone through this debate with an anal retentive Register of Deeds on several occasions. ?ÿShe believes one size fits all. ?ÿShe cannot comprehend "It depends."

At times the most recently recorded document is probably the best to cite. ?ÿOther times it is the first vesting deed to the current owner, which may have been 50 years ago. ?ÿFrequently, it makes sense to refer solely to the deed that created the tract involved in the project.

The usual way of doing things is to trace a chain of title from the current vesting deed back to the source.?ÿ Tracing title from some point in the past to the current day can be done but is, I think, less common. Plus, in a majority of cases, tracing title back to a source is not necessary. The current deed is the only one you need.?ÿ Also, the current owner carries any unwritten rights that may have accrued. So I'd go with reciting the current vesting deed.?ÿ

An exception would be if I knew there was a title issue, in which case I'd recite both.?ÿ?ÿ

For retracement purposes, you go back through the chain of title as far as you need to to ensure that you have a complete and accurate description clearly indicating the intent of the parties to the creating transaction (someone asks: "Wouldn't that mean the original deed?"... answer: "quite often, but not always.").?ÿ It is not uncommon with metes & bounds and with part descriptions that some piece or pieces of info which seemed irrelevant to a title company employee or paralegal transcribing a description to a new deed, but very important to a retracing surveyor to get dropped out of a description for one or more transactions in the chain.?ÿ Go back until it appears that you have a full description of bounds to go with the metes, or to the creating deed.?ÿ For part descriptions (the N 1/2 of the E 1/2..., the N 330', the S 2o acres, etc.), particularly if the part is some nominal aliquot or other common division of the parent parcel, go back far enough to determine if the intent was definitely or most likely the aliquot or other common division without having considered that there might be some excess or deficiency found in the parent parcel in some future survey.?ÿ For Lot & Block descriptions, the most recent is typically sufficient.

For map drafting purposes, standard practice in the regions where I've worked has typically been to label the parcel with the most recent vesting deed.?ÿ If, in performing the survey, you found some discrepancy in the wording of the most recent description compared to earlier (or the original) descriptions, explain that and how you accounted for it in a narrative or explanatory notes on the map.?ÿ In some locations it is standard practice, and IMO in all locations a good idea to list all of the reference deeds and maps you used or considered in performing the survey.

It is customary to reference the deed that you relied upon in the course of making the survey and the one that you would defend.

Most recent deed filed was a TODD

Next most recent was from Ma and Pa into the Ma and Pa Revocable Trust

One before that was from Pa to Ma and Pa because Pa was single when he acquired the tract

One before that was a collection of QCDs from 12 family members to Pa

One before that reads the south half of a tract 800 feet wide

One before that is the south 400 feet of a tract 800 feet wide

One before that was creating a tract 800 feet wide

?ÿ

The Register of Deeds won't record it unless you only cite the TODD deed as if it really means something.

The standard in NC is to label the most recent deed.?ÿ However, the question I ask myself when creating any plat is, "What recorded documents helped me the most during the course of the survey?"?ÿ Anything that makes the list gets a reference.?ÿ A surveyor in my area who is now long gone used to list all the deeds he used in one unattractive text pile below his notes.?ÿ It looked awful but it was an enormous aid in reestablishing old boundaries in a county where the RoD seemed more concerned about inventing new systems of filing deeds (Plat Book, Map Book, Plat Cabinet, Deed Book, Book of Record etc) than making sure each deed presented referenced the previous owner's deed.?ÿ?ÿ

Also, don't forget to look forward in time when researching.

?ÿ

?ÿ

?ÿ

Thanks for all the replies.?ÿ There's a wealth of information on this site.