About Amerisurv| Contact    
Magazine | Newsletter    
Flickr Photos | Advertise    
HomeNewsNewsletterAmerisurv DirectoryJobsStoreAuthorsHistoryArchivesBlogVideosEvents
 
advertisement


Subscriptions
Sponsored By

Software Reviews
Continuing Series
     RTN
An RTN expert provides everything you need to know about network-corrected real-time GNSS observations.
Click Here to begin the series,
or view the Article PDF's Here
76-PageFlip Compilation
of the entire series
Test Yourself

Got Answers?
Test your knowledge with NCEES-level questions.
  Start HERE
Meet the Authors
Check out our fine lineup of writers. Each an expert in his or her field.
Wow Factor
Sponsored By


Product Reviews
Partner Sites

machinecontrolonline 


lbszone.com

GISuser.com

GeoJobs.biz

GeoLearn

 

Spatial Media LLC properties

Associates

ASPRS

newsnow 

Home arrow Archives   The American Surveyor     

Footsteps: A Review of Nicoll vs. Rudnick Print E-mail
Written by Landon Blake, PS   
Friday, 22 March 2013

A 113Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

In this installment of Footsteps we will review a recent court decision from the appeals court in California, Nicoll Versus Rudnick. This case involves a dispute over the distribution of water drawn from the South Fork of the Kern River. Although it is primarily a water rights case, it has interesting lessons about land subdivision and the way that rights can "attach" to land instead of a person or organization. It is for these reasons I thought it would be beneficial to review the case.

Dry conditions in the American Southwest are also making water rights even more important. Oftentimes land without the legal right to water (and the physical ability to obtain that water) is worthless or of very little value. It would make good sense for land surveyors to be at least passingly aware of water rights and water rights law.

Before we look at the legal questions raised by this case and consider the court's answers, we need to review the timeline for the dispute.

Timeline
1860's: JW Nicoll constructs a three (3) mile long ditch (the "Nicoll Ditch") to supply water from the South Fork of the Kern River to his 300.5 acre parcel.

1902: A court judgment confirms JW Nicoll's right to divert appropriated water from the South Fork of the Kern River through Nicoll Ditch.

1933: The bank forecloses on a 157.70 acre portion of the 300.5 acre Nicoll parcel. The 157.50 acre parcel is lowland known as "Nicoll Field". The 142.79 acre remainder parcel is upland known as "Nicoll Ranch".

????: Rudnick acquires Nicoll Field.

????: A dispute arises between Nicoll and Rudnick over water supplied in the Nicoll Ditch.

2006: A quite title action is filed for the water in Nicoll Ditch.

2007: The trial court rules in favor of Rudnick, granting him a share of the ditch water based on parcel area and not on historic water usage.

Legal Questions
The dispute in this case centers on how the water supplied by Nicoll Ditch is to be divided between the two (2) parcels which originated from the same parent parcel. Nicoll asserts the ditch water should be divided based upon historic water usage on each parcel. This method would give Nicoll a larger share of the water. Rudnick asserts the ditch water should be divided based upon parcel area. This method would give Rudnick a larger share of the water.

These are the legal questions raised by this case:
• What is the nature of the water right obtained by JW Nicoll?
• How should the water supplied by the Nicoll Ditch be divided between the two (2) parcels (Nicoll Ranch and Nicoll Field)?

The Trial Court's Decision
The trial court ruled in Rudnick's favor with a decision that determined the following:
• The water right recognized by the 1902 judgment in favor of JW Nicoll was an appropriative right that attached to the entire 300.5 acres of the historical Nicoll parcel.
• The water right was to be divided between Nicoll and Rudnick based on parcel area, not historic usage.

The Appeals Court Decision
The appeals court confirmed the trail court's decision in this case. This is the basis for the appeals court decision:
• The 1902 judgment granted a water right to JW Nicoll's 300.5 acre parcel, not to JW Nicoll personally. This appurtenant right attached to the entire 300.5 acre parcel, even if the water obtained under the right was only actually used on a portion of the parcel.
• Water rights are included in a conveyance through foreclosure, which originally separated the Rudnick parcel (Nicoll Field) from the 300.5 acre parent parcel owned by JW Nicoll. Because the water right is an appurtenant right, and attaches to all 300.5 acres, they water right should be divided using a method based on the area of the subdivided parcels.

The court also stated that modifications of this method of dividing the water obtained by area would have required clear and direct statements in the deed that carved the Rudnick parcel from the 300.5 acre parent parcel.

Questions
This case raises some interesting questions:
• How was the deed of trust that ultimately caused the subdivision of the 300.5 acre parcel written? Who prepared it? Was a land surveyor involved in the writing of the land description that was included with this deed?
• Was any thought given to water rights when the deed of trust was prepared? 
• How do Nicoll and Rudnick now share the cost of the ditch maintenance and repair? Was this issue addressed in the deed of trust? Or is that another battle waiting to start?

Lessons
What lessons can we take away from this court decision and the events that led up to it? 
• Some jurisdictions still allow subdivisions by deed to occur when there has been a default on a loan where real property is used as collateral. The danger with this is the lack of precautions and oversight that occur in a normal land subdivision process. This risk is especially great if a land surveyor isn't properly involved in overseeing the process. I suspect more problems are experienced with this type of default initiated subdivision because the subdivision is only "theoretical" and doesn't occur unless there is a default. 
• The right to access and use water is a critical component of land use and land value in many parts of the United States, and especially in the Southwest. Water rights should be considered by land surveyors and others involved in subdivision planning.
• Rights can attach to people, organizations OR land parcels. These different types of rights are treated differently in our legal system. In this case, the attachment of the water right to the 300.5 acre parcel of land, and not any person or organization, was an important factor.

I hope you have enjoyed reviewing this court decision with me. It includes a short discussion of water rights in California and other issues that we didn't have room to discuss in this article. I encourage you to read the case itself.

I'd like to talk more about water rights and their close relationship with land division and land use in this column.

Editor's note: You can read about upcoming articles in Footsteps and get other content about boundary surveying from Landon at the Footsteps blog: www.redefinedhorizons.com/footsteps/

Landon Blake is currently project manager and project surveyor for a small civil engineering and land surveying company in California's Central Valley. Licensed in California and Nevada, his many activities include speaking and teaching at group conferences around the state.

A 113Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

 
< Prev   Next >

Marc Cheves, PS 
Editorial: A Great Year to be a Surveyor
Some magazines have what are called "theme" issues. That is, most of the content is focused on one particular subject. In my 22+ years of survey magazine publishing, my philosophy has always been to have a little bit of everything in each issue, thereby eliminating the possibility that ....
Read the Article
Jason E. Foose, PS 
Decided Guidance: Case Examinations: Halverson v. Deerwood Village
Whew! We really beat the snot out of Bryant v. Blevins and practical locations. Well this month we're back on new case that hit the Minnesota Supreme Court's docket in 1982. We've got the familiar gymnastics of jurisprudence featuring an extraordinary array of flying rope stretchers ...
Read the Article
Michel Philips 
Extreme Environment Surveying
A Franco-Chilean team of cave divers used the Nautiz X8 rugged handheld for marine cave surveying, gathering data to classify the inaccessible northern half of Madre de Dios for UNESCO World Heritage. The team of cave divers used the Nautiz X8 ....
Read the Article
Erik Dahlberg 
The Original Green Engineers
Sometimes, it's best just to leave things as you found them. That's the lesson shared by Dr. Richard Miksad and his students at the University of Virginia. As a result of studies covering nearly a decade, Miksad's teams have developed detailed ....
Read the Article
Dave Lindell, PS 
Test Yourself 49: No Dimensions
In square A-C-D-B with side S, C-E is tangent to the semicircle Q1 with diameter B-D. Q2 is the inscribed circle of A-C-E. The tangent to Q1 and Q2 meets the sides of the square at F and H and intersects C-E at t G. Q3 is the inscribed circle of C-G-H. What is the ratio of the radii of circles ....
Read the Article
Jerry Penry, PS 
Discovery on Grizzly Peak
When First Lieutenant Montgomery M. Macomb arrived in Carson City, Nevada, from Washington D.C., on July 28, 1878, his assigned survey crew from the 4th Artillery was waiting and ready for the new field season. At age 25, Macomb was the leader ....
Read the Article
Wendy Lathrop, PS, CFM 
Vantage Point: Fighting City Hall Over Land
Once upon a time (1989 to be exact) in a place not so far away from where I live, a man (Francis Galdo) bought a home across the street from a vacant parcel owned by the City of Philadelphia. That parcel, along with others, had been acquired by condemnation back in 1974 subsequent to a 1956 ....
Read the Article
Patrick C. Garner, PS 
Book Review: Boundary Retracement: Processes and Procedures
When I was in my mid-twenties and learning the honorable profession of land surveying, I was lucky to be guided by a mentor who would grab a book off his office shelf and say, "Every surveyor should have a copy of this!" The first example he waved at me was Davis, Foote and Kelly's Surveying ....
Read the Article

deliciousrssnewsletterlinkedinfacebooktwitter

Amerisurv Exclusive Online-only Article ticker
Featured Amerisurv Events
List Your Event Here
please
contact Amerisurv


Google
 
AMERISURV TOP NEWS

Trimble Intros
TSC7 Controller

GOT NEWS? Send To
press [at] amerisurv.com
Online Internet Content

Sponsor


News Feeds

 
Subscribe to Amerisurv news & updates via RSS or get our Feedburn
xml feed

Need Help? See this RSS Tutorial

Historic Maps
Careers

post a job
Reach our audience of Professional land surveyors and Geo-Technology professionals with your GeoJobs career ad. Feel free to contact us if you need additional information.

 

Social Bookmarks

Amerisurv on Facebook 

Amerisurv LinkedIn Group 

Amerisurv Flickr Photos 

Amerisurv videos on YouTube 

twitter

 




The American Surveyor © All rights reserved / Privacy Statement
Spatial Media LLC
7820B Wormans Mill Road, #236
Frederick MD 21701
301-620-0784
301-695-1538 - fax