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_   Index  
     
 

D:

 
  Desert Mountain Gold, LLC. v. Amnor Energy Corp., 2017 UT App. 218
Subject: Quit claim deed, Breach of contract,
 
 

 
  Dillon v. Barnard, 21 Wall (U.S.) 430,
Subject:
 
     
  DiMartino v. City of Orinda, 80 Cal.App. 4th 329, 95 Cal.Rptr. 2d 16,
Subject: Dedication of streets Acceptance,
 
     
  Dittrich v. UBL, 216 Minn 396, 13 N.W. 2d 384,
Subject: Boundaries, Fences,
 
     
  Doe v. Passinghan, 2 C. & P. 440, cited 1 Greenl on Ev. ยง 144,
Subject:
 
     
  Doggett v. Willey, 6 Fla 782,
Subject:
 
     
  Donohue v. Meister, 25 P. 1096,
Subject: Ejectment,
 
     
  Dorsey v. Dorsey, 21 Harris & J., 410,
Subject:
 
     
  Downe v. Rothman, 627 N.Y.S. 2d 424 (N.Y.A.D.2 Dept. 1995),
Subject: Easements,
 
     
  Dravo Basic Materials Co Inc v. State Dept of Transportation, 602 So. 2d 632 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992),
Subject:
 
     
  Drazich v. Lasson, Case No. 971333-CA. Filed August 6, 1998,
Subject: Abandonment, Railroads,
 
     
  DuBois v. Amestoy, 652 So. 2d 919, 20 Fla.L. Weekly D779 (Fla.App. 4 Dist. 1995),
Subject: Easements,
 
     
  DuBois v. Newman, 4 Wash.C.C.R. 77,
Subject: Legal title vested in U.S. until patent issued,
 
     
  Dunbar Corp v. Lindsey, 905 F.2d 754, 759 (4th Cir. 1990),
Subject:
 
     
  Duncan v. Peterson, 3 Cal.App. 2d 607 (1970), 83 Cal.Rptr. 744 [Civ.No. 11865 Court of Appeals of California. Third Appellate District, January 19, 1970),
Subject: Adverse possession, Quiet title, Implied agreement, Recognition, Permissive use,
 
     
     
  ____________________________________________________________________________  
  Page _1_ _2_ _3_   Index  
     
     

 

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