please follow all directions and answer all questions

Question

Kshitij · Accepted Answer

SAW40 - GN46612
Rivers vs. Lozeau Case
Contents
List of Figures	3
Question #1	4
Question #2	5
Question #3	5
Question #4	6
Question #5	6
Question #6	6
Question #7	7
Question #8	7
Question #9	8
Reference	9
List of Figures 
Figure 1: Boundary Controversy	3
Figure 2: Field Notes	5
Question #1 
The case is a dispute case on land portioning line in Florida , Marion Country.  
Figure 1: Boundary Controversy
Source: (Leagle, 2019)
The case is basically based on a controversy that is upon the specification as well as the location of the dividing line that is between 2 land parcels that is inside 40 acres that is sectioned in quarter – quarter. The land that is under questions was owned by Joseph Rizzo & his wife in the year 1964. The north portion of the controversial land was owned by the U.S. Forestry Service. A surveyor was retained by the Rizzo family for performing a survey in order to divide their land into internal lines that will basically part the land into internal parts. Mooorhead Engineering, the surveyor identified and undertook to monument the corners as well as the external boundaries of the land, along with that the internal lines of the land are also undertook to be monument. This case involves the land section division covering PLSS. The southwest quarter was basically divided as well as monumented by a local surveyor. The division by the local surveyor was accepted during many of the transactions of real estate & everyone is satisfied with the survey till a dependent survey is conducted by BLM ignoring the survey that is done by the local surveyor as well as the north boundaries 28 feet was also claimed. The discrepancy was based on 28 foot claimed that dragged everyone to the court with a ripple effect. 
The court of Florida in BLMs favor stated:  
 Under cadastral engineer authority the line that the boundary lines that are created by the Federal Government are real & are to be accepted as well as unchangeable.
On another section of the court the added opinion stated:  
In monument if the section internal lines the role of “Original surveyor” was played by Moorhead but in case of monumenting the external boundaries “following surveyor” was depicted by the actions of Moorhead due to the inability in defining the northern boundary that is properly defined by the surveyor of the Federal Government.

please follow all directions and answer all questions

Solution

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

Submit New Assignment