Stumbled onto an 1894 survey yesterday with a very strange purpose. ?ÿTypical east half of the southwest quarter of a section being split to sever a tract of 11 acres. ?ÿOne line of the tract with a specific bearing and distance included the phrase " through the middle of the house and through the middle of the well and through the middle of the barn". Thus, it appears there would be future co-occupation of those features for the foreseeable future. ?ÿI may research this a bit the next time I am in that courthouse. Who was listed as the owner(s) on the date of the survey? ?ÿWho received deeds to the tract and the remainder tract? ?ÿHow long before those tracts merged back into a single unit, as it is today?
Sounds like your common, everyday divided joint interest deed!
Maybe cause them siblings were fussing....
Solomon??s choice. Cut the baby in two.?ÿ
I worked on a survey a few years back that (prior to my work) had divided 40 acres (described as the SW/4, NW/4) into 4 tracts for 4 kids.?ÿ The tracts were described as "the NW/4, SW/4, NW/4 and the SW/4, SW/4, NW,4"...et cetera.
Mom and Pop had bought the place as a retirement home years earlier.?ÿ One small 1920s era farmhouse occupied the 40 acres.?ÿ The 4 probated?ÿdescriptions made no mention of the house but it was assumed one particular daughter was to receive it, as it "appeared" to be on the 10 acres she had received.?ÿ And there was an indication Mom & Pop had wished it that way, but made no mention in the wills.
My survey of the already described and conveyed four tracts of 10 acres (MOL) each determined the property line went right through the middle of the house between two of the tracts.?ÿ In my innocence I suggested we rearrange the property lines to give equal areas and leave the house with the daughter that everyone agreed was suppose to receive it.?ÿ Everybody thought that was a horrible idea.?ÿ I was paid for the survey and I backed away.
I heard they fought for a year or two in court.?ÿ That's been probably ten years ago and I bet at least two of the kids are still not talking to the other. I have no idea how they settled.?ÿ A recent Google Earth image shows the house and fences right where they always were.
I worked on a survey a few years back that (prior to my work) had divided 40 acres (described as the SW/4, NW/4) into 4 tracts for 4 kids.?ÿ The tracts were described as "the NW/4, SW/4, NW/4 and the SW/4, SW/4, NW,4"...et cetera.
Mom and Pop had bought the place as a retirement home years earlier.?ÿ One small 1920s era farmhouse occupied the 40 acres.?ÿ The 4 probated?ÿdescriptions made no mention of the house but it was assumed one particular daughter was to receive it, as it "appeared" to be on the 10 acres she had received.?ÿ And there was an indication Mom & Pop had wished it that way, but made no mention in the wills.
My survey of the already described and conveyed four tracts of 10 acres (MOL) each determined the property line went right through the middle of the house between two of the tracts.?ÿ In my innocence I suggested we rearrange the property lines to give equal areas and leave the house with the daughter that everyone agreed was suppose to receive it.?ÿ Everybody thought that was a horrible idea.?ÿ I was paid for the survey and I backed away.
I heard they fought for a year or two in court.?ÿ That's been probably ten years ago and I bet at least two of the kids are still not talking to the other. I have no idea how they settled.?ÿ A recent Google Earth image shows the house and fences right where they always were.
Careful with those commas:
SW1/4,NW1/4 =SW1/4 and NW1/4
SW1/4NW1/4 = SW1/4 of the NW1/4.
Little more about the Boundary House
