Survey Monuments and the Law

T h i s p r es en t a t i o n e xa m i n es s u r v e y m on u m e n t s in t h e c o n t e x t o f o u r l e ga l s y s t e m . I t b e g i n s by e s ta b l i s h in g f u n da m e n ta l t e r mi n o l o gy a n d c o n c e p ts t ha t h a ve b e e n m is u n d er s t o o d o r m is a p p l i e d b y s ur v e y o rs . T h e r e l a t i o ns h i p be t w e e n m o n u m e n ts a n d la n d t i t l e i s d i s c u s s e d . T h e d i f f e re n t w a y s i n w h i c h t h e l a w v i ew s m o nu m e n t s a r e e xa m in e d a l o ng w i t h a pp r o p r ia t e a pp l i c a t io n o f t h e ru l e s . T h ro u g h o u t t h e p r es en t a t i o n r e f er e n c es a n d i l l us t ra t i on s a r e us e d t o h e lp p a r t i c i pa n ts b e t t e r u n d e rs t a n d t h e ma t e r ia l a n d p r i n c i p l es d i s c u s s e d . The impor tance o f monuments cannot be ove r emphas i zed i n boundary su rvey ing . Boundary monuments have been recogn i zed as essen t i a l to an orde r ly soc ie ty for mi l l enn ia . Roman c iv i l i za t i on fe l t so s t rong ly on the sub jec t tha t they had a god-of -boundar ies , Terminus . JudeoChr i s t i an soc ie ty l i kewise ho lds boundar ies , and the monuments tha t mark them, in h igh es teem. "Cu rsed be he who remove th h i s ne ighbor ' s l andmark" (Deu teronomy 27 :17 ) . Monuments a re the ac tua l l i nk be tween Record-Lega l -T i t l e and the l and i t se l f . "Eve ry conveyance of l and mus t s tar t f rom ev idence tha t p roves the pos i t i on of a t leas t two monuments somehow re l a ted to the wr i t ten record " . The use of monuments in l and survey ing requ i res a thorough unders tand ing of the lega l p r inc ip l es by wh i ch they , and o ther ev idence , are eva lua ted . Ana ly s i s o f record and f ie l d da ta per ta in ing to boundary dete rminat ions i nvo lves the use of many " te rms o f a r t " , i .e . words and phrases tha t have mean ings o the r than the i r common usage . Expe r ience has shown tha t many d isagreements be tween ind i v idua l s , pro fess iona l and o the rw ise , o r i g i nate f rom a d i f fe rence in the mean ing o f the te rms used to convey bas i c f ac t s and concepts . A mutua l accep tance of the te rmino logy used can f ac i l i t a te the d i s cuss i on and reduce the inc idence o f these d i sagreements . S ince "...mos t o f the l aws per ta in ing to p rocedures used in l oca t ing l and boundar ies a re common law de r ived f rom cour t op in ions expressed in boundary l i t i gat ion... " , te rm ino logy th roughou t th i s d i s cuss ion w i l l use those mean ings adopted or de f ined by our lega l sys tem. For that purpose , the fo l l ow ing l i s t i s o f fe red as a beg inn ing: S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 1 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 Corner "A po in t on a l and boundary a t wh ich l ines meet " , i .e . an ang le po in t i n the per imete r o f a parce l . Monument A s t ruc tu re in tended to mark the locat ion of a corner ; a permanen t ob jec t na tu ra l o r ar t i f i c i a l wh ich i s a l andmark es tab l i shed to ind i ca te a boundary . Accessory A nearby phys i ca l ob jec t to wh i ch a co rne r ( s i c monument ) i s re fe renced for i t s fu tu re iden t i f i ca t i on or re s to ra t ion . Accessor ies a re na tura l o r ar t i f i c i a l w i tness / re fe rence monuments and o the r ob jec t s that a re re la ted to a corner /monument by d i rec t ion and o r d i s tance . They cons t i tu te a par t o f the corner monument i t se l f . Examples o f accessor ie s inc lude sub-monuments , s t radd le rs , sw ingt ies , l eads -andtacks , and ch i se l c rosses , as we l l as memor ia l s . Memoria l A durab le ar t i c l e depos i ted in the g round a t the pos i t i on o f a corne r ( s i c monument ) to pe rpe tua te tha t pos i t i on... usua l l y...at the base of the monument . Memor ia l s are a form o f accessory tha t o f ten prov ide the bes t ava i l ab le ev idence of the or ig ina l l ocat ion o f a co rne r monument . Examples o f memor ia l s in c lude broken g lass , charcoa l , s c raps o f i ron , bo t t les and prev ious monuments . Evidence Tes t imony , wr i t i ngs , mate r i a l ob jec ts , or o ther th ings presen ted to the senses tha t a re o f fe red to p rove the ex i s tence o r non-ex i s tence o f a fac t . Proof The es tab l i shment by ev idence , in the m ind o f the t r i e r o f f ac ts ( judge/ ju ry ) , o f a requ is i te degree o f be l i e f conce rn ing a pa r t i cu l ar fac t . In c iv i l t r i a l s , such as boundary l i t i ga t i on , the degree o f be l ie f requ i red i s by a "p reponde rance o f the ev idence" as con t ras ted w i th " to a mora l ce r ta in ty" , wh i ch i s requ i red in c r im ina l t r i a l s . Presumption By ru le o f l aw, an assumpt ion o f a fac t made f rom ano the r fac t o r g roup o f fac t s found o r o the rw ise es tab l i shed in an ac t ion ( t r i a l ) 9 . P resumpt ions are no t ev idence , bu t i n the absence of ev idence to the con t rary they can se rve as an a l te rna t i ve to ev idence . A l though some presumpt ions are conc lus ive (usua l l y s tatu to ry in or ig in ) , mos t are rebu t tab le . When a parce l o f l and i s f i r s t c rea ted as a separa te en t i ty , the par t ie s to the t ransac t i on es tab l i sh the boundar ies by the i r mutua l agreement . In modern t imes th i s i s accompl i shed by a deed bu t h i s to r i ca l l y the cus tom of l i ve ry and se i sen was used to t rans fe r " t i t l e " . In e i the r case , S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 2 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 i f the par t ies de f ine the corners as be ing a t l oca t i ons occup ied by monuments they ( the par t i es ) have prov ided de f in i te means by wh i ch the i r t rue in ten t i ons can be de te rmined . The common ve rnacu la r and many of the s tandard tex ts o f ou r pro fess ion re fe r to such s t ruc tu res as "Or ig ina l Monuments " , bu t f rom th i s po in t f orward we wi l l re fe r to them as Corner Monuments . A we l l known ru le o f thumb in survey ing i s that Corne r Monuments have no e r ror o f pos i t ion i f : (1 ) They are ca l led fo r (d i rec t l y o r imp l ied ly ) in the wr i t ten desc r ip t i on ; (2) They are i den t i f i ab le as the ca l led fo r monuments ; and (3 ) They a re und is tu rbered 0 . I t i s impor tan t to remember that monuments , in and o f themse lves , have no s ign i f i cance . Monuments ga in s i gn i f i cance by the au thor i ty o f the par t ies to a conveyance , e .g . the i r agreement to be bound by the monuments ' l oca t i ons . A l l p roper ty owners are bound by the ac ts o f the i r p redecessors in t i t l e . I f the predecessor has g ran ted away a por t i on of h i s /her p rope r ty r i gh ts to a th i rd par ty , a successor in in te res t cannot deny such r i gh ts o r c l a im them as the i r own . So too i s a successor in i n te res t l im i ted by h i s /he r p redecessors ' pronouncement regard ing boundar ies and Corner Monuments . Bu t what i f the par t ies agreed to be bound by monuments tha t we re to be se t a t a l a te r da te? There i s no s ta tu te or common l aw tha t p roh ib i ts the par t ies f rom do ing so . Modern subd iv i s i on prac t i ce o f ten inc ludes "pos t monumenta t i on" . Deve lopers f requen t l y se l l lo ts to d i f fe ren t bu i l ders pr i or to comple t i on o f the pub l i c improvements and the es tab l i shment o f f i na l su rvey monuments . So too , buye rs and se l le r s somet imes agree to have a "subsequen t" su rvey usua l l y unde r cond i t i ons where an " immedia te " su rvey i s no t read i l y ava i l ab le . Wou ld no t the monuments , in e i ther case , be the bes t ava i lab le ev idence o f the t rue in ten t i on o f the par t i es? Thus i t can be seen tha t fo r Corner Monuments (a .k .a . Or ig ina l Monuments ) to con t ro l ove r o ther te rms of the deed (metes , a rea, e tc . ) they do no t , necessar i l y , need to ex i s t on the da te o f conveyance they on ly need to be ca l led fo r in the deed 1 . The au thor i t y o f the l and owner (s ) to agree to be bound by boundary monumenta t i on ex tends to o thers in the cha in -o f t i t l e . When adjo in ing owners agree to es tab l i sh , on the ground, a boundary tha t may d i f fe r f rom the Record Lega l T i t l e , the l aw, under the prope r c i r cumstances , suppor ts the i r dec i s i on . So , when co te rminous owners , th rough a Paro l Agreement , monument ( " f ence" ) , a mutua l l y accep tab le l ine i n tended to S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 3 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 r eso lve the i r "unknown" boundary , they have subs t i tu ted the marked l ine fo r the desc r ibed l ine ca l led fo r in the i r deeds . And the i r successors in in te res t are bound by tha t dec i s ion , even though the agreement i s not i n wr i t i ng 2 . Wh i le in recen t years the scope of the use o f Paro l Agreements has been res t r i c ted by some s ta te cour ts 1 3 and leg is l a tures , the use of Lo t L ine Ad jus tments has been crea ted to mee t the need . The mos t s i gn i f i can t d i f fe rence be tween the two processes be ing tha t the l a t te r has a "pape r t ra i l " , e .g . the Record Lega l T i t l e i s updated usua l l y th rough the exchange of Qu i tc l a im Deeds . Bu t the author i ty o f the co te rminous landowners i s the same , as i s the e f fec t on the i r successors in in te res t . Perhaps the ex t reme app l i ca t ion o f the concept l i es in the acceptance o f a monument as represen t ing the loca t i on of a co rne r th rough the ru le o f Common Repor t . When the es tab l i shed Corner Monument has been des t royed (or i s o therwise unrecove rab le ) and the pub l i c ( l andowners , surveyors , e tc . ) have fo r many years accep ted and used a monument wh ich cannot be p roven wrong i t w i l l be accepted as the t rue Corne r Monument 4 . The ru le o f Common Repor t has been app l ied to boundary corners no t l i nes . That does no t say tha t a boundary l ine cou ld no t be de f ined by two co rne rs each accepted th rough Common Repor t . Moreover , the Federa l Ru les o f Ev idence , and mos t s ta te coun te rpar ts , p rov ide an except i on to the Hearsay Ru le in a l low ing proof o f boundar ies by " repu ta t i on i n a commun i ty " 5 . When recorded documents ind i ca te tha t a su rvey was p rev ious l y conduc ted , the monuments es tab l i shed fa l l i n to one o f th ree ca tegor ies : ex i s t ing , ob l i te ra ted o r l os t . "Ex i s i t i ng" means tha t the corner monument , o r some par t o f i t (a f ragment , w i tness , accessory , memor ia l , e tc . ) , has been recovered and the o r ig ina l l oca t i on can the re fo re be f i xed w i th a h igh degree of conf i dence . "Ob l i te ra ted" means tha t the corner monument and i t s appur tenant par ts have been des t royed (or a re o the rw ise un recove rab le ) but tha t the o r i g ina l l o ca t i on can be f i xed by the use of o ther re l i ab le ( co l l a te ra l ) ev idence . Th i s in c ludes s i tua t i ons where a documented "paper t ra i l " shows tha t a cur ren t monument rep laced the prev ious , o r i g ina l monument . "Los t" means tha t the corner monument and i t s par ts cannot be recovered AND the re i s i nsuf f i c ien t co l l a te ra l ev idence to f i x the or ig ina l l ocat i on . Cour ts do no t l i ke to f ind tha t a monument i s " l os t " and wi l l go a l ong way in accep t ing ev idence as su f f i c ien t to avo id such a conc lus ion . S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 4 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 The type of ev idence tha t i s admiss ib l e to rees tab l i sh the l oca t i on of a record , unrecove red co rne r monument depends upon the d i s t i nc t ion be tween and w i th in these ca tegor ies . Gene ra l l y , an ex i s t ing corne r monument shou ld be rep laced by f i r s t us ing f ragments o f the monument i t se l f , nex t by i t s memor i a l s , and f ina l l y by i t s accessor ies , a l l o f wh i ch cons t i tu te d i rec t ev idence o f the or ig ina l l oca t ion . The reason ing beh ind th i s o rder res ts on the l i ke l ihood of e r ro r p roduced by the usage . Lack ing d i rec t ev idence , the pos i t i on o f an ob l i te ra ted co rner monument shou ld be f i xed by the use o f co l l a te ra l ev idence of i t s o r i g ina l l oca t i on . As used here in , co l l a te ra l ev idence means ind i rec t or c i r cumstan t i a l ev idence tha t ind iv idua l l y o r co l le c t i ve ly tends to show the appropr ia teness o f the loca t i on be ing asse r ted. Examp les o f co l l a te ra l ev idence used to es tab l i sh the or ig ina l pos i t i on o f a co rner monument i nc lude : jun ior surveys 6 , ad jacen t improvements 1 7 and even hearsay tes t imony . Co l l a te ra l ev idence i s i r r e levan t and immate r i a l i n res to r ing an ex i s t ing co rne r monument (whe the r ind i ca t i ng the same or a d i f fe ren t l oca t i on ) and wou ld there fo re be exc luded . A los t corner monument i s one where the o r i g ina l pos i t i on i s no t de te rm inab le by the use of d i rec t o r co l l a te ra l ev idence 8 . A co rner shou ld no t be cons ide red l os t unt i l a l l means o f f i x ing i t s pos i t i on have been exhaus ted 9 . Los t co rne r monument pos i t i ons a re re s to red th rough the use of p ropor t ionate measu rement tha t p laces the new monument a t a loca t ion mos t harmon ious w i th su r round ing monuments ra the r than where the o r ig ina l monument was p l aced 0 . Because of th i s d i f fe rence the te rm " rep laced by p ropor t iona te measurement" i s a lega l f i c t i on , and i t i s the "method of l as t resor t " 2 1 . In the eyes o f the l aw, surveyors a re he ld in h igh es teem. Be ing g iven an exc lus ive f ranch i se and regu lated by the s ta te , surveyors are quas i pub l i c o f f i c i a l s whom the l aw presumes to have fa i th fu l l y execu ted the i r du t ie s . The surveyor i s p resumed to have prope r ly and co r rec t l y marked the boundary 2 . As a resu l t , monuments o f record a re p resumed to ex i s t . Moreove r , ev idence o f a prev ious su rvey ra i ses a p resumpt ion tha t monuments were es tab l i shed 3 . There fore be fo re a su rveyor wou ld be au thor i zed to es tab l i sh a new monument a t a l ocat i on "occup ied" by a record monument he /she wou ld f i r s t need to overcome the lega l p resumpt ion tha t i t i s s t i l l p resen t . I t i s the ob l i ga t i on o f the su rveyor to search fo r those co rne rs and monuments ca l led for d i rec t l y or i nd i rec t l y in the record , and then to repor t on the ev idence found per ta in ing to them 4 . When , fo l lowing a good and d i l i gen t search , no ev idence o f the record monument i s recove red a s imple s ta tement o f S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 5 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 tha t f ac t ( such as " s fn f " ind ica t ing: searched fo r , no t found) ough t to be su f f i c ien t . Obv ious ly , a l l ev idence d i s cove red in the course of the su rvey mus t be shown on the p la t . The record pe r ta in ing to the descr ip t i on and/or the loca t ion o f monuments ra re ly matches , i n i t s en t i re ty , the ev idence found in the f ie ld . A l lowance mus t a lways be made for the ravages of t ime and human e r ro r . A leng th o f i r on p ipe manufac tu red and so ld as "3 /4 inch" , wh i ch i s i t s ins ide d i ameter , has a 1 inch ou ts ide d i ameter . Su rveyors who are no t dendro l ag i s ts somet imes misdescr ibe t ree spec ies . Be tween two measu rements o f the d i s tance and d i rec t ion o f a l i ne the re i s v i r tua l l y a lways some d i f fe rence . The ques t i on that na tu ra l l y ar i ses i s : How c lose i s " c l ose enough"? Unfo r tunate ly the re i s no abso lu te answer , desp i te some of us hav ing been t ra ined tha t " i f i t f i t s unde r my hat , i t ' s good enough" . These are mat te rs o f profess iona l judgement , and the su rveyor wou ld be we l l adv i sed to e r r on the s ide o f cau t ion . That i s , i f the d i f fe rence be tween record and recove red causes some concern , he /she shou ld seek ou t cor robora t i ve ( co l l a te ra l ) ev idence be fo re accep t ing o r re jec t ing recove red monuments as those ca l led for i n the record . I t i s no t uncommon to f ind a monument in the f ie l d o the r than as descr ibed in the deed or on a subd iv i s i on /parce l map. The goa l o f a re t racement survey i s to i den t i f y the l oca t i on of the o r ig ina l parce l boundar ies and co rners ; monuments are mere ly too l s ass i s t ing tha t goa l . I f an acceptab le record shows tha t the recove red monument i s a d i rec t pe rpetua t i on o f the ca l l ed fo r co rne r monument , the found monument shou ld be accorded the same d ign i ty as the o r i g ina l . Examples o f an "acceptab le record" inc lude pub l i c records such as p l a ts o f (subsequen t) Subd iv i s i ons and Parce l Maps , Records -of -Su rvey and Corne r Records . In te rna l re cords o f pub l i c agenc ies (Coun ty Su rveyors , C i ty Eng inee rs , e tc . ) are cons idered quas i -pub l i c records and gene ra l l y have near ly the same c red ib i l i ty as pub l i c records . The in te rna l re cords o f pub l i c u t i l i t i es a re o f ten cons idered quas i -pub l i c records as we l l a l though the i r c red ib i l i ty may no t be as grea t as those of a pub l i c agency . Even the f ie l d no tes o f a p r i va te surveyor may be an "acceptab le record" a l though the c red ib i l i ty o f p r i vate reco rds i s gene ra l l y less than (quas i )pub l i c reco rds . In the l a t te r case , the su rveyor i s we l l adv i sed to seek suppor t i ve ev idence be fore re l y ing upon such pr iva te records . S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 6 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 His to r i ca l l y , l andowners subd iv ided the i r prope r ty a t w i l l , o f ten w i th no record o the r than deeds to the "par t s " . Today mos t ju r i sd i c t i ons regu la te and con tro l "subd i v i s ions" bu t on ly some o f them app ly the same s tandards to "minor d iv i s ions" o f l and, such as the sa le o f an ind iv idua l pa rce l . When a parce l descr ip t i on ca l l s for a p la t the re a r i ses a p resumpt ion that a survey was conduc ted (and there fo re , monuments were es tab l i shed 3 ) . I t shou ld be no ted tha t in some ju r i sd i c t i ons Records -o f -Survey have been used as a means o f pe rpe tua t ing the i n format ion , mak ing the research eas i e r and more re l i ab le . In mos t ju r i sd i c t i ons , however , the records o f such l and d i v i s i ons a re o f ten sparse and not a lways i n the possess ion o f pub l i c agenc ies . Aga in , p r iva te records shou ld be va l ida ted be fo re they are re l i ed upon . I f the su rveyor d i s cove rs monuments o f the same desc r i p t ion a t var i ous l oca t i ons th roughou t the l and d iv i s ion they cou ld be accepted as the bes t ava i l ab le ev idence o f the in ten t ion o f the par t ies to the in i t i a l conveyances and accord them the s ta tus o f co rne r monuments 1 4 . Bu t , when the recovered monumenta t ion var ies in desc r ip t i on ( ind i ca t i ng numerous , d i f fe ren t su rveys ) acceptance of the marked l oca t i ons as the t rue co rne rs depends upon an ind iv idua l ana ly s i s o f the ev idence and p rocedures used to es tab l i sh each one . Not w i ths tand ing the above , non-record monuments shou ld no t be accepted as mark ing a co rner w i thou t co r robora t i on . The co l l a te ra l ev idence wh i ch a su rveyor cou ld use i n such cases i nc ludes : s t ree t improvements made a t a t ime when the or ig ina l su rvey con tro l was l i ke ly to have ex i s ted and there fore have been used 5 ; l i nes o f occupat i on , such as fences 1 7 ; bu i ld ings ; and ra i l r oad t racks . Absen t a p reponde rance o f ev idence tha t a non-record monument marks a corner i t shou ld not be used to de te rm ine a boundary 6 . Once the r i gh ts o f a g ran tee have ves ted , a subsequen t su rvey cannot d i ves t those r i gh ts by de l inea t ing the " co r rec t" l ine 7 . In mos t su rveys the record and f ie ld ev idence ga the red con ta ins con f l i c ts . The reso lu t i on o f these conf l i c ts i s a t the hear t o f the p rofess iona l p rac t i ce o f l and su rvey ing . Mos t o f us have agon i zed i n these s i tua t i ons ove r the process o f we igh ing the ev idence co l l e c ted and forming a profess iona l op in ion . And , we have wor r i ed abou t whe the r or no t we were go ing beyond the scope of ou r au thor i t y as su rveyors i n the process . These concerns a re no t necessary . What boundar i es a re i s a ques t i on o f l aw; where they a re l oca ted i s a ques t ion o f fac t 8 . "Un less the or i g ina l corner monument i s found, the ques t ion o f i t s pos i t i on i s one of fac t (no t l aw) and needs to be shown S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 7 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 by a p reponderance o f the ev idence..." 9 . F rom th i s , i t shou ld be c lea r tha t the su rveyor mus t , u l t imate l y , accep t some ev idence (or a f fo rd i t more we igh t ) and re jec t o ther ev idence (or a f fo rd i t l e ss we igh t ) in the p rocess o f f o rming a p ro fess iona l op in ion . "When one group ing of a se t o f f ac ts con forms more c l ose ly than any o the r comb ina t i on o f cond i t i ons se t f o r th in the record (and the o r i g ina l su rvey ) , you then have the mos t reasonab le so lu t i on that i s p robab ly ava i l ab le . Th is i s the Theory o f Ma jor Probab i l i t y 3 0 " . The reason tha t monuments are genera l l y p re fe r red over o the r forms of ev idence (such as bear ing and d i s tance ) i s because the par t ies are less l i ke ly to e r r in the i r use , bu t monuments do no t have an " in f lex ib le p r io r i ty " 1 . So , what happens when or ig ina l monuments a re in con f l i c t w i th each o the r? Where the o the r te rms o f the deed ind i ca te tha t a monument does no t cor rec t l y express the in tent i on of the par t ies , the reason fo r the pr inc ip le ceases 2 . Poss ib ly the mos t common occu r rence of th i s s i tua t i on i s i n modern subd iv i s i ons where monumentat i on of bo th cen te r l i ne and f ron t l o t co rne rs ( the R igh t o f Way l ines ) are ca l led fo r on the p l a t . Ce r ta in ly , th i s t ype of con f l i c t can and does occu r e l sewhere , and the conf l i c t ing monuments need no t have been es tab l i shed in the same survey . When the ca l l f o r monuments i s i ncons i s ten t w i th the ca l l fo r o ther monuments and i t appears f rom the ev idence tha t they were inadve r tent l y inse r ted they w i l l be re jec ted as f a l se and repugnan t 3 . In shou ld be borne in mind tha t a monument may be re jec ted as con tro l l ing one l i ne wh i le i t i s accep ted as con tro l l ing another , i n te rsec t ing, l ine . Pe rhaps the bes t known examp le o f th i s i s the con tro l a f forded "c los ing co rne rs " in U.S . Pub l i c Lands su rveys . That wh ich separates the pro fess iona l boundary su rveyor f rom the techno log i s t i s th i s : The former re l i es upon a l l ava i l ab le ev idence , g iv ing the g rea tes t c redence to tha t wh i ch mos t l i ke l y expresses the i n ten t i on of the par t ies on the da te the parce l was f i r s t conveyed; wh i le the l a t te r re l i es pr imar i l y o r exc lus ive ly upon measurement . The goa l o f re t racement surveys , and the du ty wh i ch the l aw imposes upon us , i s to p rove the loca t ion o f boundar ies and corners . To th i s end the or ig ina l co rne r monuments , o r the p l aces tha t they occup ied, a re ou r f i r s t resor t . Bu t the lega l pr inc ip les tha t a re par t o f the ar t o f survey ing a re no t formu las ( l i ke the phys i ca l sc iences ) in to wh i ch da ta i s inser ted where in p rec i se , cons i s ten t answers are obta ined . One surveyor may g ive more or less we igh t to some of the ev idence than anothe r . I t i s p rec i se ly because o f th i s complex ba lanc ing o f the fac t s , and the S u r v e y M o n u m e n t s a n d T h e L a w 8 / 1 2 © C h u c k K a r a y a n , L . S . A C S M C o n v e n t i o n , N a s h v i l l e , T N . , A p r i l 2 0 0 4 d i f fe rences tha t can the reby be p roduced, tha t su rvey ing i s a PROFESSION. I t i s the render ing o f an OPINION, based upon our knowledge , t ra in ing and exper ience , wh ich se ts us apar t f rom the t rades . Add ing to ou r know ledge , t ra in ing and exper ience i s the l i f e l ong endeavor o f a PRACTICING SURVEYOR.