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     

Decided Guidance: Wacker vs. Price—Part 3-Conclusion and the Dissenting Opinion Print E-mail
Written by Jason E. Foose, PS   
Saturday, 24 June 2017

A 557Kb PDF of this article as it appeared in the magazine—complete with images—is available by clicking HERE

We are back in Phoenix, Arizona again this month. The Arizona Supreme Court went all guns-a-blazin' in Wacker vs. Price. I highlighted the concurring opinion last month. This month we'll dissect the dissenting opinion by Justice Udall.

I guess the best place to start is near the end of Justice Udall's dissent. "It is our view that under the record of this case it may be conclusively presumed there being no evidence to the contrary that the Grand Avenue Addition was laid out in accordance with the government survey of the area which it embraces." I'm not comfortable with that presumption as a land surveyor, nor was Chief Justice Cooley, nor was Justice Stanford, nor, by the way was F.M. Holmquist. In fact, I think, the only reason I reject that presumption is exactly because I am a land surveyor with extensive knowledge and training in the subject matter of retracement. Otherwise the presumption works, as I suspect it is supposed to, without our special brand of knowledge and experience. So the baker, banker, millwright, and Justice only have that presumption to work with.

The Grand Avenue Addition plat itself is inconclusive and evidence indicated it was not originally laid out on the ground. So Justice Udall apparently uses the term "laid out" as meaning drawn or planned.

Let's face it, it's a decent picture for a guy and an inkwell in 1887 but some assembly is required. The contemporary copy that I downloaded from the Maricopa County website shows that point very clearly. The only preparation data I see is "C.J. Dyer, Draughtsman" and the recording data. What I don't see is more telling than what I do. I don't see any words like "engineer, civil engineer, architect, surveyor, city planner, subdivider, or land owner". I do not see any absolute ties to any government monument or monuments themselves for that matter. From that era I'd be willing to accept a dot or a circle at the end or angle point in a line as being indicative of a field observation or a call with certainty. All I can determine from this plat is that the islands of lots most likely fall within the opposing quarter sections of Section 6.

Oh, by the way, isn't Section 6 the one that the G.L.O. "draughtsman" protracted back in D.C. as well? Where's all that G.L.O. ballyhoo fall on the Grand Avenue Addition plat? According to the GLO plat we have a deficiency of 41-1/2 feet or so in the north line of the Section. Unfortunately Mr. Dyer did a poor job of showing his "yardstick". So right off the bat the "first surveyor in" is faced with ambiguity between the G.L.O. and the Grand Avenue plat! Justice Udall and I agree that Grand Avenue Addition should fit in Section 6. The difference is a question of what or which evidence defines how it fits.

I honestly can't tell from this plat if the streets insulate the lots from the G.L.O lines, or the G.L.O lines are the centerlines, or if the G.L.O lines are the exterior of the Subdivision. There's some conflict in the drafting that seems to make assumptions troublesome at the midsection lines... at least to me. Regardless, my training and knowledge directs me to answer the mysteries of the plat with the evidence on the ground. The dissent was not willing to take that leap and accept what F.E. Holmquist was laying down.

Irony #8 and Parting Thoughts
Just a few short decades after the Supreme Court of Arizona exercised the highest form of peaceful deliberation and chiseled a resolution onto the stone tablets of history, the Federal Highway Administration and Arizona Department of Transportation showed up on site with the bulldozer and erased Wacker v. Price from the face of the earth. Every day between 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. traffic passes the site in a "funeral-like procession" crawling a few miles per hour as motorists pay their respects to the Honorable Supreme Court of Arizona...no, wait, that's just rush hour traffic on I-10. 

Note: A copy of this case is available at http://www.amerisurv.com/PDF/WackerVPrice.pdf.

The original GLO plat can be found here: https://glorecords.blm.gov/details/survey/default.aspx?dm_id=107721&sid=o3xu4box.wtm#surveyDetailsTabIndex=1

Jason Foose is the County Surveyor of Mohave County Arizona. He originally hails from the Connecticut Western Reserve Township 3, range XIV West of Ellicott's Line Surveyed in 1785 but now resides in Township 21 North, Range 17 West of the Gila & Salt River Base Line and Meridian.

The Barbershop Barrister

Do you need a haircut and legal advice? I'm neither a licensed barber nor attorney, so my rants and $15 might get you a clean cut for your next court appearance but that's it. The dissenting Justice Udall was concerned that appellate Courts customarily hold the facts in the most favorable light sustaining the lower Court's judgment and that didn't happen here. The case was apparently tried by a single Judge rather than a jury. So if there's a problem with the lower Court's handling of evidence then it seems natural to me that the Appellate Court would out of necessity have to become a trier of fact and reopen the evidence. Justice Udall made this sound like a travesty. I gather this is a rare event and perhaps nearly non-existent when a jury is employed by the lower court. Regardless, I find a lot of comfort in the sentinel role Justice Udall took up in the preservation of our sacred legal system. The Majority is attacking the lower court by reevaluating the evidence and deserves every flaming tar ball catapulted in its path.

Best I can tell nothing really new was introduced as evidence except perhaps the Court taking notice of the facts that the plat was originally outside of the Phoenix City limits and covered with mesquite trees. Justice Udall's concerns about the evaluation of the evidence seem "half a bubble off" to me. The majority used the plat map as a means to an end whereas the lower court and dissent held it as the end of the means. It seems like the lower court is treating the plat as a well written contract whereas the majority has taken the sum of the evidence to demonstrate how the people have determined the language of a poorly executed contract (the plat). In any event the majority overturned an errant decision. More importantly Justice Udall's dissent is a necessary function of due process along with the special concurrence by Justice Phelps. I suspect all of these opinions together make the decision whole and are intended to keep the scales of justice in balance. Maybe this game is not about right or wrong, but rather simply answering the questions to the best of human ability.

A 557Kb 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


Javad Intros
Total Solution

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