Upload
tony-nettleman
View
195
Download
1
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Since the major percentage of a surveyor’s work is the location, identification and retracing of boundaries described in deeds and other legal documents, this seminar is designed to provide the boundary surveyor with an understanding of the technical and legal responsibilities of locating land boundaries. The course will cover boundary creation, identification, and retracement of land boundaries.
Citation preview
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
WHAT MUST BE CONSIDERED IN STATE BOUNDARIES
• How the original boundaries were created
• When or how many times the boundaries were changed or defined
• What words were used in creating them
• Were they surveyed and described
• What authorities created them
• How are they defined today
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
MICRO BOUNDARIES
• Boundaries between individuals
• Boundaries between parcels
• Boundaries between lots
• Boundaries between estates of land
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
THESE BOUNDARIES ARE FOUGHT
• In the air
• Under the sea, or…………..
• Wherever they are located
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
JOHN LOVEGeodesia by John Love, 1658
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
CHINA AND JAPAN BATTLE IT OUT USING WATER HOSES
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
WHAT TWO STATES HADTHE FIRST PROBLEM?
• New York
• South Carolina
• New Jersey
• North Carolina
• Connecticut
• Rhode Island
• Maryland
• Massachusetts
• Virginia and Delaware
• Pennsylvania
• Georgia
• New Hampshire
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
THE REHOBOTH AGREEMENT
• Both states appointed boundary commissioners and gave them unlimited power to “run the boundary line” and AGREED ON A BOUNDARY
• But the Massachusetts legislature refused to ratify the agreement in 1848
• Then Massachusetts sued Rhode Island in the Supreme Court
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
CN | www.CNettleman.net
NEW JERSEY v. NEW YORK 523 U.S. 767 (1998)
LET’S TAKE A LOOK AT WHY NEW JERSEY WON
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
THE SYMBOL OF AMERICA
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
MICROFILM COPY OF ACCOMPANYING 1835 PLAT
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
CN | www.CNettleman.net
MISSOURI v. KENTUCKY78 U.S. 395 (1870)
“It seems that the old maps (those ex. Gr. Prior to A.D. 1800), indicative of the physics
and hydraulics of the Mississippi, are not greatly to be relied upon”
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
MOVEMENTS OF THE RIVER
www.cnettleman.net [email protected]
TARRANT COUNTY V. DENTON COUNTY139 S.W. 3D 22 (Texas 2004)