Lakefront Meander Line, Accretion, and a Neighbor's Fence
A 40-acre inland-lake lot in Oakland County is described in the deed as 'Lot 7, Lakeview Shores, according to the plat recorded in Liber 22, Page 14, together with all lands between the lot and the water.' The 1924 plat shows a meander line 60 ft lakeward of the lot's rear line. The current ordinary high water mark (OHWM) is 18 ft lakeward of that meander line. A fence built in 1998 by the owner of Lot 8 encloses a 12-ft-wide strip of Lot 7 along the common side line and runs to the water; the neighbor now claims that strip by adverse possession. The lake fell gradually about 1.1 ft between 1992 and 2012 and has been stable since. The client wants your survey to depict the fence as the boundary and to omit the meander line because it 'confuses the title company.' A 2005 EGLE permit authorized a seawall at the current OHWM. You have the plat, the deed, a 1972 survey showing the then-water's edge, and current aerial imagery.
1. How should the boundary between Lot 7 and the lake be determined? Address the meander line, the OHWM, accretion, and the 2005 seawall permit.
Read the worked answer
Start with the deed and plat. The meander line is a reference line used to compute area and is generally not the legal boundary; the boundary of a riparian lot on an inland lake is the ordinary high water mark (OHWM), unless the plat or deed clearly makes the meander line the boundary. The 1972 survey and aerial imagery show a gradual, imperceptible fall of about 18 ft, so the exposed strip is accretion. Under Michigan riparian law, accretion belongs to the riparian owner, Lot 7. The 2005 EGLE permit authorizes a seawall at the current OHWM; it does not transfer title or fix the boundary. Therefore, Lot 7 extends to the current OHWM, not to the meander line and not automatically to the fence. Show the meander line for reference, the current OHWM as the boundary, and the accretion area. Do not omit the meander line; it explains the title history and the area difference. If the lake-level change had been sudden (avulsion), the boundary would remain at the old OHWM; the gradual record here supports accretion.
2. Does the neighbor have a viable adverse-possession claim to the 12-ft strip? What should your survey show?
Read the worked answer
The fence dates to 1998, so the 15-year Michigan adverse-possession period has run. But time alone is not enough. The neighbor must prove actual, continuous, open, notorious, exclusive, and hostile possession, and, depending on the theory, payment of taxes. A fence used only for occasional access or maintained jointly may not be exclusive or hostile; permissive use defeats the claim. The surveyor does not decide title. Show the fence as an occupation line, label it 'fence-not a boundary of record,' and note the neighbor's claim and the 12-ft overlap. Show the record lot lines and the accretion. Do not depict the fence as the boundary or omit the discrepancy. Advise the client that a quiet-title action or written boundary agreement may be needed; a survey is evidence, not a judicial determination.
3. What must be shown and recorded, and how do you respond to the client's request to omit the meander line?
Read the worked answer
Show the record plat lot lines, meander line, current OHWM, accretion, fence, seawall, and all monuments found or set. Include the basis of bearing, area, and a note that the fence is an occupation line. The client's request to omit the meander line would make the survey misleading; decline. If you set or reestablish a corner, file the required Michigan corner record with the county register of deeds within the statutory period. If the survey is a boundary survey, sign and seal it and include your certification. Do not certify the fence as the boundary. Provide a written explanation of the accretion and the adverse-possession issue, and recommend legal review. If the client insists on a misleading map, withdraw.