Parol Evidence VI – 1.5 Contact Hours
The case-in-chief is Theriault v. Murray, Maine Supreme Judicial Court, 1991. The boundary dispute in this case started when a surveyor retracing the common boundary between Theriault and Murray could not take his eyes off the measurements in the deed, and in the process ignored the called-for monuments. By utilizing the precise measurements in the deed, the surveyor moved the common boundary from its original position along a vegetation line next to an old roadbed, to a new position crossing Theriault’s hay field that he had farmed for 15 years. This case is about the importance of parol evidence (Old Timer always knows where the boundary is located), and about fundamental deed interpretation and the rules of construction. This is a 2-Page Letter covering 1 Court Opinion consisting of 4 pages. This 6-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.