California Surveyors Forums

there are two parcels in lot 4. My clients deed is clear. The sly 811' of ely 537' of lot 4.. The deed of other lot adjacent to and surrounding my clients starts at different point. It is about 20 courses including along approx. stream. Each and every course is listed as approximate. There are no bearings given with courses on side lines of lot 4. (cant calc closure). The last two courses (from east line) are west APPROX 495' (vs 537) and south APPROX 830' (vs 811) to south line....
What gives? What should I give client?
I'm not sure (yet) which is senior. Even if clients deed is junior what reason could I have not to give him 811 x 537 given every course on other deed is approx. and uncertain? Can "approx. 495'" be same as 537'?
Any ideas?
TIB

Find out who is senior, that's what I would do first. If it's your lucky day, your client is senior.

The 'approx' would be +/- 1 foot ( as a start ).

Have you done any Geo overlays yet in Cadd?

Occupation rolls into this one.

Also look for at terms from older nearby surveys what "erly" means.

Hate those. But they usually work out.

Even if clients deed is junior what reason could I have not to give him 811 x 537

If your client is junior THEN you have to re establish the senior line FIRST ( all 20 approx. distance courses )- better you than me! Cause that is how it is done and what a court would agree with. Occupation MAY come into play but not until you know who was first grant.

Your post is unclear where you say

The last two courses (from east line) are west APPROX 495' (vs 537) and south APPROX 830' (vs 811) to south line....

This looks like a continuation of your EDM v Chain thread.

You need to look at a couple of things to try to get some perspective.

1. When did the description first appear in a deed?

2. Who measured the lines for that description?

and

3. How were the lines measured?


You may never be able to definitively answer the 2nd and 3rd questions, but if you find the answer to the first, you may be able to make some reasonable educated guesses at the other two.

For instance, if the description first appears in a deed from the 1880s, it's just as likely that the original parties did the measuring as it is that someone trained and authorized as a surveyor did. Prior to 1891, the State Surveyor General's Office and the County Surveyors were the only recognized parties authorized to perform surveys for others. In many, if not most locations, land owners had little hope of having the County Surveyor be available to mark out what they wanted to convey, so they just did it themselves.

In such cases, the landowner may or may not have had any training or aptitude for making reliable measurements, and may or may not have had equipment to do the job well. Directions may have been determined by compass and may or may not have taken declination into account. Distances may have been measured with a chain or tape, a knotted rope, or in many cases, may have been paced. They may have measured horizontal distances, or may have measured roughly with the contour of the ground.

Even if there had been a survey done by the County Surveyor, that was far from a guarantee that it was performed well. I have reviewed surveys by a County Surveyor in the 1860s that misclosed by several dozen feet. Similarly, some of the Townsite surveys performed under the California Townsite Act of 1868 are notorious for town lots misclosing by several feet.

So, if the description originated in the 1800s, or if it is a reasonable possibility that the landowners themselves made the original measurements, then approximately 495' could be the same as 537' according to the original measurement.

But also look at other things such as what the record consisted of when the description was written. Do the dimensions of your client's description added to those of adjacent parcels at the time the parcel was created add up to some previous record distance of a line of the parent parcel?

Is it possible that 811' vs 830' accounts for an alley, driveway or roadway that either now or at one time existed?

In short, you need to look at all the reasons why the record deed dimensions vary to the extent that they do from what is actually there. don't just see a discrepancy and then automatically look to see where senior rights reside. That may ultimately be the proper course of action, but there may also be some plausible explanations that explain the discrepancies.

If evidence can provide some reasonable explanation for the dimensional discrepancies and support existing boundaries, those boundaries are most likely the original lines.

if the lines were measured at all. The sidelines of lot 4 start on top plateau then drop more than 500' down to river. It is nearly vertical and very rugged with dense brush and boulders. Call it a cliff. It would be next to impossible to have been measured directly with a chain

Still could have been done with stadia, maybe with triangulation, or derived from previous records.