Abandonment document

Plumb Bob · Post by **Plumb Bob** » Mon Jul 22, 2013 7:44 am

I have been asked to prepare the documents for the abandonment of a portion of an easement. I have to prepare a sketch and description.
The probelm is the existing easement (written in 1968) doesn't really work due to double calls and is a portion of a parcel in the same description which doesn't close by 3'. It's just poorly written; both the parcel description and the easement. There's no existing drawing showing the real intent.
The title company typically want to perpetuate the written deed that's being abandonded but how would you show it in the sketch knowing that mathematically it doesn't work? I don't want to show just the deed dimensions as any surveyor could look at it and see that it's not right. Do you show both the deed dimensions and your calced dimensions? Do you just show the deed dimensions and add a note saying basically that the deed doesn't work but it's being abandoned anyway?
Just curious how some of you would handle this.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Fri Jul 26, 2013 5:43 pm

"Do you just show the deed dimensions and add a note saying basically that the deed doesn't work but it's being abandoned anyway?"

Yes, that's exactly what you do. Why make it difficult if the problem is being solved by making the easement no longer exist. Once the abandonment is recorded, the easement location is moot - a non-issue, because it will no longer exist.

Draw your cartoon showing the nominal location of the easement, add your note that the record description does not close (in case someone ever decides to recreate the easement), attach the record description, and send
'em your bill for efficiently creating the document and being diligent in identifying a flaw in the record description.

Ben Lund · Post by **Ben Lund** » Sat Jul 27, 2013 5:01 am

I agree with Evan. I'm surprised a described parcel doesn't close unless there are no "TO" calls (i.e. "TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING"). I'm trying to imagine a "double call" that creates an open figure and I can't see how it would. Double calls just put a point in two, potentially equally viable, locations.

Plumb Bob · Post by **Plumb Bob** » Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:31 am

I ended up doing just as Ernie said.

As for the calls; It had a bearing/ distance to a point that was a bearing/distance of of 2 different side lines which createted a problem as the the rest of the description was curves and tangents based on the first beraring/distance call. It was a bit of a mess.

Thanks guys.