California Surveyors Forums

Greetings,

Two years ago I prepared a parcel map for one of my clients. During the tenataive mapping stage, it was diccovered that my clients southern fencline was 7 feet onto my clients side. The southern neighbors were allowing their dogs to freely roam this area. We double cheched our boundary, deeds etc, and notified our client to the fact. a tentative map disclosing the encroachment, was sent to and recieved by the southern neighbors.
The map and encroachment issue were brought befor city planning commission. The project was passed and it was agreed that a "full block" survey would be performed to delineate the boundary line prior to any map being filed.
We performed the boundary evidence survey as usual, finding original monumentation (old subdivision) and prudently measured the "south 224'" of the lot, which is the "exception" to our clients deed. We advised our client that "he" must resolve the fenceline issue with his neighbors prior to our continuance. 2 months later, the client called informing us "the fence" had been removed, dogs tethered and we could proceed.

In 2007, the "southern neighbors" have filed suite claiming professional negligence, and that we are guilty merely for allowing the fenceline to be removed.
They are claiming adverse possession, survey error, and negligence. They have not produced a "certificate of Merit"

Any thoughts?

Thanks Ian,
(sorry, Ive been very ill)

My client removed the fence after his neighbors tethered their dogs.
My office then set the corners marking the deed exception (senior) of the south 224 feet of lot 4.

My client then placed a new fence on the monumented line.
Several attempts to speak with the clients neighbor were unsuccessful. We could no approach the house due to the guard dogs. The phone number was unlisted. My client explained that he had everything under control with the neighbor. We were instructed to "flag" the south line of lot 4 then measure 224 feet north and paint lines at the edge of the paged roadway, so all of the parties could view the evidence for themselves.

The project was completed with no further incidence and the map was filed.

The suite claims adverse possession. Professional malpractice.(surveyor) and property damage. (my client) I reviewed the case and found no "negligence" claim. (sorry) The suite also claims damage from the local jurisdiction, whom which has filed a counter suite against Me and My client.
(I believe this to be just a formality.)
My attorney states that I cannot hire my own second opinion for court testimony so arraingements are being made for a nonpartisan surveyor to check into this (compensation. . . OF Course) !!

Thanks again.

Its a very bad economy to have a lawsuite take moneys away from my employees "hold onto their jobs" fund.

The adverse possession claim should evaporate. If the neighbor chained up the dogs for your client to move the fence, the neighbor acquiesced to the new fence. Acquiescence implies that the possession was relinquished and cannot be adversarial.

The professional malpractice can only be proved based on competent testimony from qualified professional peers who state that your work was below local standards, that you did not act in a prudent manner and you failed to meet local standards of care. The easiest defense to such a claim is to have your own peers who testify to the fact that your work did meet local standards, that you did act in a prudent manner and that you did meet local standards of care. That means your attorney should at least hire another competent land surveyor to review your work. How else will your attorney know how to defend against this portion of the charges?

The land surveyor your attorney hires should be hired as a Consulting Expert to review the work and determine the merits of the case and the possible directions for the defense strategy. Under the rules of evidence, the work product of a Consulting Expert cannot be disclosed through discovery. It is privileged information to be shared ONLY by the attorney and the expert the attorney hired.

The reason for this is simple. You are entitled by the Constitution to a defense. In order to mount a defense, your attorney must rely on a qualified experts review of the case to fins that defense. If the expert determines that your work was substandard, it would be a significant blow to your defense for that information to be available to the other side. The rules of evidence allow your attorney to better understand the case without the jeopardy of providing information that could more completely incriminate you or your actions.

While I can understand your attorney telling you not to hire another surveyor, I have to assume that your attorney is hiring another surveyor to review your work.

Pleas forgive me if I’m off base, but, from your syntax and word choice, I have to assume that you are not a native born American. One of my concerns is that there is a language barrier of sorts that might prove detrimental to you, your case and your defense. If you need to, please feel free to email me privately or call me.


Ian

How can the neighbor be taken seriously if he has not hired his own surveyor to prove you wrong? If your work is correct, then there should be no dicrepancies between the two surveys. Furthermore, from your timeline stated, if the neighbor actually did hire a surveyor to establish a property line, is his Record of Survey filed with the county? It seems that the 90 day timeline for him to file his map has expired per PLS Act, Section 8762 (c)(d).

I would think this is good information for you to use in your defense, if it already hasn't been identified.

Thanks Guys,

To arrive at our conclusions, we retraced the old lots using monuments which referenced found original redwood 4x4's. We actually found the original 4x4 at the sw corner of the subject lot 4. This corner had been found and referenced on a parcel map in 1976. interestingly, that map displayed a fenceline to be 7 feet north of the south line of lot 4. this fence was placed on the north side of a ditch. The centerline of the ditch was (more or less) on the south line of lot 4. Today, the south line of lot 4 is not fenced, or further east, the fenceline is on the south line of lot 4 as it was retraced on subsequent maps (circa 1950's - 1970') We proved out lots north of lot 4 and south of lot 4 to see if a 7-foot shift had occured. Remarkably, the measurements were within .2' of the old record. Several maps noted finding original lot corners during their surveys. The fenceline which was 7 feet north of our clients south line, was of a different character than the southern neighbors fence material. unfortunately my field crew took pictures of everything else except the area of possible dispute. The plaintiff's attorney doesn't realize or understand what he is doing, by persuing this matter without merit.
Do I have a case against him? this is costing a great deal of money, time and lost sleep.

Dave H