Lost Quarter Corner and a Meandered Lake Lot
In T139N, R29W, Cass County, the 1872 GLO plat shows Section 14 with a meandered lake along its north side. The original stone at the SE corner of Section 14 is found, marked '1872,' and the original stone at the SW corner is also found. The south quarter corner between Sections 14 and 15 is lost; the field notes record it at 40.00 chains from the SE corner, with a bearing tree. Your measured distance between the found SE and SW corners is 80.35 chains. The record distance is 80.00 chains. Along the lake, the patent to Lot 3 describes 'Lot 3, Section 14, containing 42.50 acres, according to the official plat.' The present ordinary high water mark is about 32 ft north of the meander line shown on the 1872 plat, and the owner wants Lot 3's north boundary 'per the acreage.' A 2024 survey by another firm set a pin at the meander line.
1. Restore the lost south quarter corner and state the measurement you would use.
Read the worked answer
Use a single proportionate measurement between the two found original corners, the SE and SW corners of Section 14. The record distance from the SE corner to the quarter corner is 40.00 chains, and the total record distance between the SE and SW corners is 80.00 chains. The measured distance between the found corners is 80.35 chains. Proportion: (40.00 ÷ 80.00) × 80.35 = 40.175 chains, or 40.18 chains, from the SE corner along the line toward the SW corner. Set the lost quarter corner at that proportionate position. Do not use the bearing tree alone, and do not hold the record 40.00 chains, because the original corners show the line is longer than record. The result is a single-proportion restoration, appropriate because the quarter corner lies on a line between two found original corners.
2. Does the 42.50-acre area or the 1872 meander line control the lake boundary of Lot 3? Explain.
Read the worked answer
Neither the stated acreage nor the meander line controls the lake boundary. The meander line was run to compute area and to describe the fractional lot on the plat; it is not a boundary line. For a meandered lake, the water boundary is the ordinary high water mark, and the acreage in the patent is descriptive rather than controlling. The owner cannot hold the 1872 meander line merely because the patent says 42.50 acres, nor can the owner extend to the present water by ignoring the patent. The survey should locate and show the ordinary high water mark as the water boundary, show the meander line as a record reference, and note the 32-ft difference. If the lake is navigable, the state's interest in the bed must also be considered. The 2024 pin at the meander line is not controlling because it is not an original monument.
3. What should the surveyor do about the 2024 pin set by another firm at the meander line?
Read the worked answer
Show the 2024 pin as a found survey monument, identify it as a later-set pin rather than an original GLO monument, and show its relationship to the meander line, the ordinary high water mark, and the restored lot lines. Do not accept it as the corner merely because another surveyor set it. A later surveyor's monument can be evidence of a boundary location, but it does not override original government monuments or the legal water boundary. If the pin conflicts with the ordinary high water mark, the survey should disclose both and explain the conflict. The client should be advised that the meander line and the pin do not establish title to the lakebed or the water boundary; legal review may be needed if the lot is to be conveyed or improved near the shore.