Questions and Answers Landmark Surveying Contact Us Landmark Surveying
Home Landmark Surveying Services Landmark Surveying Our Company Landmark Surveying Why Survey Landmark Surveying

Survey Related
Court Cases

  SURVEY RELATED COURT CASES:  
     
  Page _1_ _2_ _3_ _4_ _5_ _6_   Index  
     
 

B:

 
  Brown v. Clawson, CA 01-569, January 9, 2002,
Subject: Acquiescence, Adverse possession,
 
 

 
  Brown v. Hobson, 3 A.K. Marsh 382,
Subject: Original monuments control,
 
     
  Brumley v. Hall, 110 Cal. App. 2d 638, Civ.No. 8118 Third Dist. Ap. 29, 1952,
Subjects: Proportionment of lots,
 
     
  Bryan v. Beckley, Litt. Sel. Cases, 91, 94,
Subject: Original monuments control,
 
     
  Bryan v. Forsyth, 19 How. 334,
Subject:
 
     
  Bryant v. Belvins, 9 Cal 4th 47 (1994), 36 Cal. Rptr. 2d 86, 884 P. 2d 1034 [No. S034604 Dec. 19, 1994]
Subject: Agreed boundaries, Acquiescence,
 
     
  Bryant v. Price, 893 S.W. 2d 856 (Mo.App. S.D. 1995),
Subject: Easements,
 
     
  Bucki v. Cone, 25 Fla, 1, 6 South.Rep. 160,
Subject:
 
     
  Buford v. City of Tampa, 88 Fla. 196, 102 So. 336,
Subject:
 
     
  Bullock v. Wilson, 2 Porter, 436,
Subject:
 
     
  Burgess v. Alabama Power Co., 658 So. 2d 435 (Ala. 1995),
Subject: Easements,
 
     
  Burgess v. Gray, 16 Howard 65,
Subject: Status of title issued prior to patent,
 
     
  Burnell v. Roush, 404 P. 2d 836, 840 (Wyo. 1965),
Subjects:
 
     
  Burns v. Crescent Gun & Rod Club, 116 La. 1038, 41 South.Rep. 249, 29 syc. 293,
Subject:
 
     
     
     
  ____________________________________________________________________________  
     
  Page _1_ _2_ _3_ _4_ _5_ _6_   Index  

 

Home Services Our Company Why Survey? Q & A Contact Us
Facebook Landmark Surveying LinkedIn Landmark Surveying