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  
     
 

C:

 
 

 
  Cox v. Laycock, 2015 UT 20
Subject: Election vacated, Commission seat,
 
     
  Cox v. Partin, 148 Fla. 445, 4 So. 2d 673,
Subject:
 
     
  Craig v. Paulk, 176 2d 529 (Supreme Court of Kansas, January 25, 1947),
Subject: County surveyor, Identification of tract, No adverse possession, Monuments, Mistakes in possession, Person's belief of ownership,
 
     
  Craig v. Provo City, 2016 UT 40
Subject: Governmental immunity act, Theft,
 
     
  Crane v. French, 50 Mo.App. 367,
Subject:
 
     
  Crawford Realty Co v. Ostrow, 150 A. 2d 5, 9 (R.I. 1959),
Subject:
 
     
  Criterion Interests Inc v. Deschutes Club, 136 Or.App. 239 P.2d 110 (Or.App. 1995),
Subject: Easements,
 
     
  Curtis v. Sutter, 15 Cal. 257,
Subject: Status of title issued prior to patent,
 
     
  ____________________________________________________________________________  
     
  Page _1_ _2_ _3_ _4_ _5_ _6_   Index  
     

 

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