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

Sponsored By

Software Reviews
Continuing Series
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







Spatial Media LLC properties




Home arrow Archives   The American Surveyor     

Editorial: Dykes v. Arnold Print E-mail
Written by Marc Cheves, PS   
Thursday, 20 June 2013

A 456Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

In response to Chad Erickson's two articles about Dykes v. Arnold, Steven Patterson, an LSIT and first year law student at the University of Missouri, wrote a letter with several criticisms of Chad's article. In looking over Steven's comments, some were minor--for example, Chad's misuse of the term precedence and precedent--because Chad's intent was clear. Another comment by Steven pointed out Chad's misuse of Appellate and appellant, but again, Chad's intent was clear.

A third comment, however, cut to the heart of the issue: "Mandatory authority vs. persuasive authority: Mandatory authority is precedent that is binding on that particular jurisdiction. Persuasive authority is precedent from another jurisdiction that may be considered by the court. Also, secondary sources, such as Clark on Surveying and other treatises, books and law restatements are only persuasive, not mandatory authority on courts. This distinction is very important."

Steven's main criticism was with Chad's statement that Dykes v. Arnold has been used as persuasive authority in courts all over the nation. Steven said, "Only decisions by Appellate courts and the Supreme court of each state, and of course the U.S. Supreme Court, are binding on that state (mandatory authority). Federal Court decisions can be binding on that particular court, but most boundary issues are state law, so federal courts do not have a lot of these cases. Only the higher courts publish decisions, trial courts do not usually publish decisions because they are merely enforcing precedent in their jurisdiction, they are not creating new law. Again, this hierarchy and the mandatory/persuasive authority rules are very important."

Erickson: "`Flying under the radar' is is an aspect to be considered; sometimes my client's boundary conflicts were resolved when my Survey Reports, citing Dykes, persuaded the opponent to drop the case. Because they don't make it to court, such will not show up in a [case law] search. However, isn't this the highest service that we can offer to the public?"

Patterson: "Of course, I highly recommend surveyors help resolve their client's problems without litigation. However, if Dykes is not the controlling law in your jurisdiction, I would be hesitant to claim that it is. If it is analogous to other cases in your jurisdiction that are controlling, why not cite those? It would be irresponsible to cite a case that is not controlling authority in your jurisdiction, because it is quite literally irrelevant until a court in your jurisdiction says it is relevant."

Patterson: "Boundary law is a state issue, with the exception of inter-state boundary disputes, administrative decisions (e.g., BLM) and some riparian issues. State courts can most certainly use persuasive authority (e.g., Dykes v. Arnold--if not in Oregon--and Clark on Surveying), but will do so only when the mandatory authority in their state is insufficient or nonexistent. A state court will not even look at persuasive authority unless there is insufficient state precedent to resolve the issue. This brings me to my contention with the articles. Although it offers an interesting discussion and I would recommend everyone read it, I do not understand the infatuation with Dykes v. Arnold, especially if you do not live in Oregon. Dykes is a well-reasoned decision, but the holding is not surprising. The result is what one would expect; surveyors should try to adhere to monuments that fit occupation or possession, or which were subsequently used in other surveys. The decision is an Appellate Court decision, meaning it is binding only on Oregon trial courts and on the Oregon Court of Appeals. It is not even binding on the Supreme Court of Oregon and certainly not binding on the other 49 states."

Patterson: "You stated in Einstein: "This case has since been recognized as persuasive in courts all over our nation." In response to John Freemeyer's feedback on Einstein you stated: "...it can be very persuasive, as it already has been, even in eastern states. Persuasive Professionals win cases." While I agree that persuasive professionals win cases, surveyors do not have a lot to do with that. Persuasive attorneys win cases, attorneys do not readily take "precedent advice" from any non-attorney, nor should they."

Erickson: "In the five times that my surveys have gone to court, in only one instance was my client blessed with an attorney who was knowledgeable in land boundary law. The others neither knew of precedent ("precedence" is a perfectly legitimate word and application, however I will henceforth respect your profession's convention, and thank you for the insight) nor bothered to look for it. All attorneys were appreciative of my efforts to supply citations (although not always impressed with the citation itself)."

Patterson: "The issue I have with these statements is that I researched the cite history of Dykes and found it cited in only three (3) cases since its publication in 2006. Two (2) were from Oregon, one (1) from Montana. The Montana case merely used the township diagram from Dykes. I would like to know what you are referring to when you state that Dykes has been persuasive "all over the country" and "even in eastern states."

Erickson: It is significant to note the lack of cases in opposition to Dykes v Arnold. I spoke with attorney Wesley W. Hoyt and he confirms your assessment that Dykes has been cited very little nationally. However, he had the following additional observations:
1. "As a property law attorney who has litigated these matters for over 40 years, it is clear that anyone touting a different principle of law (original corner is superior to mathematical corner) would be erroneously contriving a conflict..."
2. "The reliability of the principle announced in Dykes v. Arnold is so high, that I would be able to cite that case with confidence as adhering to the correct principle of controlling law for all US jurisdictions North of the Ohio River and West of the Mississippi River..."
3. "One must also consider the 1993 Mich. case of Adams v. Hoover, upon which Dykes is based."

Patterson: "I agree 100%, a mathematical position will never control over an original monument. Again, this is one of my biggest contentions with Dykes. The holding that a retracing county surveyor is considered an original surveyor is problematic. Based on this logic, a county surveyor today, if he was the first surveyor to subdivide the section, would be considered an original surveyor. If a county surveyor in this position today were to stub in the center quarter corner, would a court uphold it against a correctly proportioned corner? If he truly is an original surveyor, based on the reasoning of Dykes, his erroneously set corner in 2013 would be considered original and error-free and the correctly proportioned corner set next week would be wrong. I do not think this is a rule that the Oregon court intended to articulate. The fact that other courts in the U.S. have not cited the case tends to support this. It was an equitable decision, which only courts can make, not a new boundary law principle.

"The case Dykes v. Arnold has been widely discussed in magazine articles, on blogs and by surveyors at length. It has been touted by fence-line surveyors everywhere as the "new standard in surveying." The bottom line is that no court outside Oregon has even mentioned Dykes in a decision. At the end of the day, it does not matter if you love or hate the law. The law is the law. If your state does not follow Dykes, and no state has, then you are required to follow your state's law, regardless of how much you like another state's law. P.S. ­ none of this would even be an issue if the first person would subdivide the section correctly, the first time."

Cheves: In summary, what you have just read is a condensed version of a lot of back and forth between Chad and Steven. Steven is correct: Dykes only applies (for now) to Oregon. Chad is correct in that Dykes represents a sea change, and it's something all boundary surveyors should make sure any attorney they interact with is aware of. After all, if an original corner has no standing, where does this leave our work? And how is the public protected?

Marc Cheves is editor of the magazine.

A 456Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

< Prev   Next >

 American Surveyor Recent Articles
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


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


Sokkia Intros
T-18 Controller

press [at] amerisurv.com
Online Internet Content


News Feeds

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

Need Help? See this RSS Tutorial

Historic Maps

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 



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