Apportionment Rule IV – 1.5 Contact Hours
The case-in-chief is City of Mount Carmel v. McClintock, Illinois Supreme Court 1895. What happens when all of the lots and blocks in a subdivision are laid-out with a faulty chain “leaving a considerable surplus in each block”? The land surveyor in this case, working for the city, proceeded to correct the entire subdivision throwing the landowner’s lot six feet out into the right-of-way, as shown upon the plat. Even though the landowner had built his improvements and planted trees along the right-of-way lines as originally laid out and the city had ostensibly accepted this location by building sidewalks up to the landowner’s improvements; upon the strength (or weakness) of the new survey, the city threatened to remove the improvements and cut down the trees. The city’s claim is that it is due its full right-of-way according to the plat. The landowner claims ownership in accordance with his occupation and practical location. Can the landowner adverse possess against the city? Is that even the question? This is a 2-Page Letter covering 1 Court Opinion consisting of 5 pages. This 7-Page document has a 10-Question examination based on the text of the newsletter and the case-in-chief.
OBJECTIVES: To enhance professional competency and improve practitioner’s knowledge of the law as it relates to the practice of land surveying.