Legislative Cousel Opinion on Limitations on Liability for Land Surveyors

[Jim Frame]

I didn't get a lot of sleep last night, so I'm kind of fuzzy-headed today. In any case, I'm having trouble interpreting the meaning of the qualifying clause that appears repeatedly throughout the opinion: "if the subject property is not otherwise physically improved or constructed upon." Anyone care to clarify?

[pls7809]

I interpreted that as meaning that you do a survey on a parcel and then no improvements or construction was made after your survey. I don't know if that's correct though.

[LA Stevens]

This is certainly a step in the right direction.

I always considered the topographic map or boundary survey an improvement to the property.

Tom,

Give me a call and maybe you, Chris U. and I can go out next week for a drink or grab a bite. I may even buy, given what your new wage is per the Gov.

[Ian Wilson]

Wow! At first pass through the opinion, I would say that Ms. Mohan has sent us a very nice present, in deed!

It would appear that our limitation in such cases where the surveying results in a direct, physical improvement to the property through any form of construction is four or ten years after the substantial completion of our services.

Ms. Mohan points out that the statutes and body of case law is silent as to our liability in cases where there is no construction. However, she goes on to suggest that defining the boundary, setting monuments, filing a Record of Survey, preparing a topographic map or the like could be construed as an improvement to the property under the liberal definitions of improvements taken by previous courts.

In short, gentlefolk, it appears that the Legislative Counsel has signed off on the limitation of our liability to four or ten years after the substantial completion of our work!

This doesn’t mean that a case will not be filed against us outside that period. However, the court would likely bar the claim as stale as it did in Smith v SHN referred to in the opinion.

I move that the CLSA Board of Directors issue a written Thank You to Ralph Simoni, Esq. For carrying our question to an attorney of clearly impeccable talents, skills and knowledge and that our Board also pen a very gracious Thank You to both Ms. Boyer-Vine, Esq. and Ms. Mohan, Esq. I’d suggest a case of Sangeovese or Phenomenon from Benesere Winery for each but such a gift might be considered a tip or payment for service that would not be allowed to such clearly superior government employees.

There be much to celebrate tonight, my fellow surveyors! There be MUCH to celebrate tonight. A fine crop of newly minted peers and a fine opinion limiting our liability!

Now…back to calcing this bloody grading plan for tomorrow. At least, if I screw it up, They’ve got ten years to bring a claim against me at best!

Oh, and the four year period seems to be based on a CONTRACTUAL obligation. Yet another fine reason to adhere to PLS Act §8759 !