2/26/2026 3:31 PM – Jerry Mahun, PLS – A Wisconsin surveyor since 1979.

Jerry does Mentoring Mondays – https://jerrymahon.com

Original Spice Girls? – In India, 5 gals killed a man over a boundary dispute.

Learning Objectives:

  • How boundaries are created; Characteristis
  • Where the Rules of Construction come from
  • How gaps and overlaps are handled
  • Description interpretation issues: Ambiguities; Controlling/informative terms

A. Jerry mentioned Stare Decisis and Common Law and how that works with respect to the Apealate Courts.

B. Statute of Frauds – the contract must be in writing.

C. Boundaries

Are either created or re-established

1. Creation

               Controlled by statutory law.

               Examples: Subdivisions; Condominiums; Small land divisions; Cemeteries, etc. …

Regulations may define:

               Minimum lot sizes, maps, descriptions, monumentation, survey accuracies

               USPLS: Federal level letters

               1855 – First Manual

               2009 – Latest Manual

               Procedures, survey accuracies, monumentation, documentation, etc.

               Are either created or re-established?

Re-establishment seeks to re-create a boundary in its original location …

               A resurvey collects evidence and surveyor evaluate and surveyor evaluates it to determine original corner locations.

Re-establishment is controlled by common law.  

               Provides evidence evaluation framework

               Evidence quality and quality are paramount.

A. PARENTAGE

How boundaries are created affect: (a) Description type; and (b) How are gaps and overlaps handled.

Boundary Creation – Establishes boundary once and forever; creates adjoiner relationship(s); location is “without error,” and creates evidence framework for later re-establishment.

Creation methods – (a) Simultaneous; (b) Sequential; and (c) Combination.

(a) Simultaneous: Boundaries created at the same time by the same legal instrument have equal standing – i.e. No Senior/Junior Rights Relationship.

(b) Sequential: New parcels created independently from the same parent over time … The Earlier created boundaries have precedence (senior) over later created ones (junior).

(c) Combination: New parcesls created by combination of simultaneous and sequential processes… New boundaries can have characteristics of either or both. Senior-junior standing may or may not exist. Note: Description type – Quai-metes and bounds; “of”.

A. Rules of Construction (RoC)

Evidence framework established at original boundary creation,

               Deed (written intent) and (possibly) physical monumentation.

               Over time, evidence added and removed based on human and natural

               Collateral evidence is secondary, often derived from original evidence.

               EXAMPLES: FENCES, STREETS, REPLACEMENT MONUMENTS, PAROL, ETC.

               At boundary re-est, evidence may conflict – So, how to resolve.

Evaluation Guide

  • Rights of possession (unwritten rights)
  • Senior right (in cases of overlap)
  • Written intentions of the parties (description)
    • Call for survey
    • Call for munuments; adjoiner
    • Direction/distance
    • Area/Coordinates

NOTE: If the elements conflict, RoC indicates their relative weight … BUT, this is not strict, it’s overlall guidelines; Description wording can change order; As can evidence type and character; if higher elements are lost, lesser ones carry greater weight.

B. Rights of Possession: Unwritten Rights

Based on adjacent owners’ actions/inactions

               Ownership departs from description … Doctrines:

  • Adverse Possession
  • Prescription
  • Oral Agreement
  • Equitable Estoppel
  • Recognition and Acquiescence

Ownership determined by courts / Surveyors doesn’t have authority / Map deed and use (along encroachment) lines.

C. Senior Right: Gap or Overlap

Precedence establishment – Once boundary is created, Sr-Jr relationship is established and doesn’t change unless boundary is legally removed. Question: Is a boundary attribute, not an owner attribute.

“Child” inherits “parent’s” Sr-Jr standing along shared boundaries.

Parent is junior to children – parent must provide.

>or= 2 adjoining children from common parent-overlap/gap potential …

Sequential – Along sr-jr boundaries: (a) sr parcel protected in case of an overlap – the junior parcel yields; (b) If excess, then what happens with the gap? Answer: Touch situation: Give to one parcel or other or split between?

[Add Slide Info]

Combination – Parcel boundaries may or may not have sr-jr relationships: Example – Sequentially: “West 100.00 ft if Kit 12” kater “East 100.0 ft of Lot 12”.

D. Written Intent

               1. Description

a. Description interpretation – Simultaneous: references to map or plat … Unless errors on map, intent relatively clear.

Sequential or Combination: narrative descriptions

Archaic terms, “ancient” measurements”

Written by non-surveyors

NOTE: Surveyors must follow common law principles to interpret & apply description.

b. Controlling and Informative Terms

c. Ambiguities

  • Latent – Hidden, not apparent until application. Note: May need evidence to reconstruct location.

[2. Missing Slide]

3. Monuments & Corners

4. Measurements – (a) Distance & Direction; (b) General direction – informative term.

What is a conflict? Often when there are two corners where there should be one … look at the description, it might mean that the sequence of considerations get reordered.

5. Area/Coordinates

[b] Coordinates, even with GPS, are derived quantities. Historically, not included or were informative. “Times achangin’: [Example provided of a metes and call description]

6. “More or Less” – Don’t use this general language.

7. Quasi Metes and Bounds (QM&B) – Combination Conveyances QM&B description have their own issues: Easy to write and among the most ambiguous.

2/26/2026 5:01 PM – Concluded.

2/26/2026 10:30 AM – Mike McKevilly, PLS – 2015 LSAW Past President

mikem@sittshill.com – 253.474.9449

Mike presented the list of people who are on LSAW’s legislative board.

He then indicated that they are using a software service that assists to easily track by key word when a bill that may be of interest comes up and then assists with tracking it. Though, the watching …

Deregulating Licensing Issue:

Threats on the right is a libertarian issue. Threat on the left is that you should be able to get a job. The left is more receptive to realizing that have strong licensing standards means that there is better quality of projects like bridges.

Architects and Engineers Legislative Council (AELC).

The Architects and Engineers Legislative Council is an organization of design professionals and firms who work cooperatively on legislative objectives and issues to improve business conditions in the design and construction industries.

ACEC – AIA – ASCE – ASLA – LSAW – SEAW – WSPE

Architects are the biggest player in this Christine Brewer is the chief lobbyist.

General Overview of Legislature

  • The Washington State Legislature has 147 total members – 49 senators (1 per District) and 90 Representatives (2 per District).
  • Democrats enjoy a trifecta of control in Olympia
    • House control of 59/39
    • Senate control of 30/19
  •  Legislative District Map

House of Rep. Leadership Positions

  • Speaker of the House (Jenkins (D) 27th)
  • Speaker Pro Tempore (Stearns (D) 47th)
  • Majority Leader (Fitzgibbons (D) 34th
  • Minority Leader (Stokesbary (R) 31st)
  • Majority Floor Leaderr (Stonier (D) 49TH)
  • Majority Whip (Ramel (D) 40TH)
  • Deputy Minority Leader (Corry (R) 14TH)

Senate Leadership Positions

  • Lt. Governor (President of Senate – Heck (D)
  • President Pro Tempore (Conway (D) 29th)
  • Senate majority Leader (Pedersen (D) 43RD)
  • Senate Minority Leader (Braun (R) 20TH)
  • Floor Leaders
    • Riccelli (D) 3RD
    • Short (R) 7TH
  • Whips
    • Nobles (D) 3RD
    • Wagoner (R) 39TH

WHAT WE KNOW FROM CHILDHOOD – I’m Just a Bill – School House Rock

How a Bill Becomes Law in Washington State

Mike provided number of slides here, but the basic idea is that one should seek to get the bill pre-filed. Then the Bill’s will typically first go the policy committee … and then often a finance committee.

The Bill gets changed back and forth within each chamber and then there is a reconciliation … which can still be vetoed by the Governor.

[For anyone interested in understanding the process further, review my previous blog posts regarding 1026 – the bill which became RCW 7.28.083.]

2026 Session Deadlines

Day 1 of Session:                                                                   2026.01.12

Policy Committee Cutoff:                                                2026.02.04

Fiscal Committee Cutoff:                                                2026.02.09

Houses of Origin Cutoff:                                                   2026.02.17

Policy Committee Cutoff – Opposite House:       2026.02.25

Fiscal Committee Cutoff – Opposite House:       2026.03.02

Opposite House cutoff:                                                    2026.03.06

Day 60, Last Day of Session:                                          2026.03.12

LEGISLATIVE WATCHLIST

  • PROFESSIONAL LICENSING
  • PREVAILING WAGE/LABOR
  • TAXES
  • RECORDING FEES
  • MONUMENT PRESERVATION

CURRENT CONCERNS

Surveyors in the room are most interested in watching the recording costs and monument preservations. With respect to the later, they are seeking to tie the legislation to “home affordability” … instead of being vague and overbroad as to helping “all of Washington.”

Boundary Line Adjustment process is another issue. This is not a statewide standard, but according to county standards. This is a great idea, but as a practical means, one would have to make sure that all of the counties are on board and are not going to oppose it. Then get the bill language hammered out and find an appropriate sponsor. Think through any possible opposition and sell them so that they see the bill as advantageous. Then after the bill is dropped, make sure that you count votes in committee … that’s where bills go to die – in committee. Finally, the bill will come out and be voted on the floor of the chamber in which it was introduced … and it has to go over to the other chamber for the process before there is a reconciliation – as may be needed. And of course, if the bill runs this gauntlet … the Governor can still veto it. Note: This would probably have effects on professional liability rates because it becomes a higher standard. 2/26/2026 11:54 AM – Closed a Few Minutes

Tony Chenier, PLS – Vancouver, BC – 2023 Past LSAW President

tchenier@mackaysposito.com – 360.957.0272 – 2/26/2026 8:31 AM

Professional ethics are the standards that guide our decisions and behavior when no one is forcing us to do the right thing.

  • Ethics guide decisions
  • Laws set the floor, ethics set the bar
  • Ethical decisions often live in the gray area

Important for Surveyors “to protect the public.”

“ETHICS FOR THE PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR – Second Edition.”

– Dennis Mouland, pls

Question 1. – “To Stamp or Not to Stamp” … Is it even a question?

If the real property had been surveyed by someone in your office before and they are deemed to be trustworthy, but have retired … should you yet be able to certify their previous work?

Mixed answers, in which there was an initial thought that you want to measure the land, the standards may have been different at the time, so don’t do it.

Others said, this is a “it depends” type situation, but you want to be clear as to whether it was done properly. One way would be to put language in the notes that speak to any concerns or the fact that it is being surveyed previously and that there may have been some minor discrepancies.

Basically, this is a question of when one should go out and remeasure.

Considerations:

  • What does your seal represent?
  • Liability and accountability
  • Oversight and responsibility charge
  • Public trust and professional credibility

Note that the language should on any narrative be written for understanding by the public … not other professional surveyors.

Question 2. – “Fiends, Family … and Fences”

If there are pins on the ground and the neighbors are generally in good standing, but the neighbor of your father-in-law has had a boundary dispute with another neighbor, would you do the survey.

There is the “appearance of impropriety” … but that can be overcome by doing the job in good stead.

Go ahead and advise your father, and if you actually do the job though, make sure that it is done impeccably.  

Considerations:

  • Conflict of interest (real or perceived)
  • Objectivity and professional distance
  • Pressure and exceptions
  • Public perception

Question 3. – Hey Pay, I’d like to Buy This Job

Should you take a cut in the price of a job to help take care of your people by keeping them employed. When you allow the price to go down, then it will drive the overall costs down for everyone.

The discussion ranged here from this is a business decision and an ethical decision which in a downturned economy are juxtaposed to one another.

Considerations:

  • Long-term impacts on the profession
  • Sustainability vs. short-term survival
  • Fair competition
  • Professional responsibility

Question 4. – The Little Bird

Your church is seeking to have some survey work done – by someone other than you – and a bid came in that is lowest by a crew that is not all that good. Do you indicate that the low-ball bidder should be pointed out.

Considerations:

  • Professional courtesy
  • Harm to public confidence
  • Accuracy vs. gossip
  • Reputation of the profession

Question 5. – The Budget Shuffle

The breakdown from the original bid is different in specific areas … where in some areas the price on some segments is underbudget and another segment is overbudgeted … can the budget just be switched around to make sure that the overall compensation still makes out properly.

“Good contracts make for good projects.”

It was suggested that there be a clause which allows for this sort of switching the budget around.

It is not helpful to have the engineering division walking over and seeking to put hours in to the surveyors budget … UNLESS you speak to the client.

The question is basically do you need to do better accounting for the job.

Considerations:

  • Contractual obligations
  • Transparency with clients
  • Internal integrity
  • Professional honesty

Question 6.  – Airplane Mode – i.e. you stop taking their call.

The neighbor starts to call you about information you put into a survey. How much time should you be willing to speak with that person about the survey.

We have a right to defend our own mental health, put them on notice that you have answered questions and continued conversation is not going to be productive BUT they can hire them for more information.

The Ethics Board member says that they get some people that make a complaint without ever even sought to speak with the surveyor … and others in which the surveyor refused to speak with the neighbor.  

Considerations:

  • Duty to communicate
  • Community trust
  • Escalation risks
  • Professional image

Question 7. – The Game Warden

You are at a conference, and you find out that someone at your competitor is not satisfied

and because you have swapped business cards, you decide to approach them about

coming over to your company.

Does this cross the line as to poaching someone else.

Personal observation: This question wouldn’t even be considered in the legal arena.

Considerations

  • Fair competition within the profession
  • Respect for colleagues and firms
  • Intent vs. impact of recruitment practices
  • Long-term health of the professional community

Question 8. The Super Surveyor

Someone wants to have you do a job that is well beyond your abilities. Do you want to take it on or do you refer it away. Notably, you must specify to your client your ability to perform the work. The example that was given was hydrographic surveying … because this is difficult work that most people don’t do.

An example is now bringing on drones.

Considerations:

  • Competency and expertise
  • Risk to public Safety
  • Knowing Professional Limits
  • Responsibility to the Public

Question 9 – ALTAs: The Gift that Keeps on Giving?

If you are approached to certify an ALTA Survey that has been done previously, do you charge the client again at full price, a deminimus amount, or a fair price that reflects that you already have much of the information.

Look at adding value, but make sure that it is reasonable … both to you, the client, and the profession.

Considerations:

  • Fair value for services
  • Transpareny in billing
  • Client trust
  • Market power vs. ethics

Final Thoughts  … Before you make the call – i.e. the decision.

  • Would I be comfortable explaining this decision publicly?
  • Would I stand by it if it went viral?
  • Does this decision protect the public?

2/26/2026 10:00 AM – Concluded on the dot.

MERIDIAN LAND CONSULTING, LLC – 317.345.4031

LS80040389@gmail.com

1. History / Talking Points Today

We are going to be talking about section 1 of the ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey.

This is the 11TH version. It just went into effect. They started in 1962. 1986. 1988, 1992, 1997. 1999, 2005, 2011, 2016, 2021, and now 2026 – February 23, 2026.

Ten title attorneys and Ten surveyors that get together. Steve Gold is an attorney. Gary was the chairman for 25 years. Todd Amiko is the current chair. They get together twice a year … at least for the past 5 years.

Gary had also been chairing the NSPS committee which also looks at these types of standards, but it doesn’t have a direct oversight of these standards.

They took all of this back to Minneapolis to get this done … and they had an issue that they approved everything subject to a single change which went through.

Notably, Gary gave his updates back in 2011 here at this conference in Spokane right after he concluded. I raised this and he went on to talk a bit more about this.

2. Structure / Restructuring

  • Section 1 – Purpose
  • Section 2 – Request for Survey
  • Section 3 – Survey Standars & Standars of Care
  • Section 4 – Records Research
  • Section 5 – Fieldwork
  • Section 6 – Plat or Map
  • Section 7 – Certification
  • Section 8 – Deliverables
  • Table A

3. Section Language Expanded

  • Section 1 – Purpose

Lenders will not loan money for the purchase or development of real property unless they have a title insurance policy to protect their investment.

What is the standard/general survey exception?

Found in Schedule BII:

“Rights or claims of parties in possession, boundary line disputes, overlaps, encroachments, and any matters not shown by the public records which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of land described in Schedule A.”

Now, if the mortgage lender does not find this acceptable, they will require a survey and strike this language from the policy but study the survey and write exceptions for all of the issues that the survey reveals. NOTE: These are called “Special Exceptions.”

Examples from Gary’s Own Title Policy:

  • Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the Public Records.
  • Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the Public Records.
  • Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affect the title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete survey of the Land.

UPSHOT:          The entire set of ALTA/NSPS STANDARDS – except TABLE A – is focused on the surveyor …

  • OBSERVING (“in the process of conducting the fieldwork”),
  • LOCATING, and
  • SHOWING …

Those features and conditions that the title company needs to be made aqware of in order to delete that standard exception from the title policy (“Rights or claims of parties in possession, boundary line disputes, overlaps, encroachment, and any matters not shown by the public records”).

SO, WHAT IS TITLE INSURANCE?

Title Insurance coverage includes:

  • A duty to defend the policy holder against claims against its title;
  • A duty to indemnify the policy holder for losses incurred if the condition of title is different from how it is represented in the policy (e.g. the property turns out to be encumbered by a recorded easement that the title company missed in its search).

How is this different from a title commitment?

A TITLE COMMITMENT (AKA BINDER OR PRELIMINARY REPORT)? [An Offer – Commitment to Offer Title]

  • An offer to issue a title policy on the property described identified (in Schedule A)
  • Subjec to the stated exceptions listed in Schedule BII).
  • Pursuant to certain terms and conditions upon which the issuer is willing to issue the title policy (listed in SCHEDULE BI)

Wat a title commitment is not …

  • A representation as to the condition of the title
  • i.e., it is not and abstract of title.

Lender’s vs. Owner’s policy

  • Owner’s Policy – Total value of the property from day one
  • Lender’s Policy – Only for the value of the loan; and Only for the term of the loan.

Resultantly, the title insurance company has less exposure when they are subject to a lender’s policy than the owner’s policy. So, title insurance may do more for the lender than the owner … the title company “may insure over it.”

Question: If this is “looked over” how does this implicates the survey? Does it need to be removed now? The lender might “request” that it be returned.

Alternatively, if an easement is found and you call the title insurance …

  • Thanks so much.
  • Familiar, but it was released. Then, the surveyor should ask for the release.
  • Familiar, but we are insuring over it. Show or at least explain the existence of the easement on the survey UNLESS there is a demonstration that the easement has been abandoned, extinguished, or vacated. THE DO NOT LIKE THIS, BUT THE SURVEYOR HAS TO SHOW OR EXPLAIN. As a negotiating tactic, show it initially and then remove the showing of it … but explain it as a note. [Notably, the title company is not obligated to provide some of this information.]

11:05 – No Break Until Lunch.

Survey-Related title insurance endorsements:

  • Zoning

[New Language at Section 3.2 – PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS … but be patently clear, Best practice would be to go to a second sheet AND express EXACTLY where the information came from.]

  • Utility [See Table A]
  • Access
  • Easements
  • Contiguity [Putting several properties together … and then a legal description of around the TOTAL PERIMITER – i.e. the properties’ aggregate circumference – BUT if there is a GAP, it NEEDS to be included.]
  • Address
  • Property same as survey

2/25/2026 11:18 AM – Q&A

  • Mentoring Monday’s – Ask Gary
  • What happens when there are Easements which the Title Insurance has hidden? Potential Answer: Place indemnification language in the surveyor’s contract with their client.

2026 LANGUAGE CHANGES –

“A complete ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey includes:

A.          the fieldwork required pursuant to Section 5.

B. the preparation of a plat or map pursuant to Section 6 showing the results of the fieldwork and its relationship to documents provi9ded to or obtained by the surveyor pursuant to Section 4.

C.          any information from Table items requested by the client, and

D.          the certification outlined in Section 7.”

[2/25/2026 11:35 AM – HE MENTIONED ATTORNEY JOE JONES WHO MENTIONED THE SURVEYOR SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE A WRITTEN CONTRACT. NOTE: GARY CERTIFIES ONLY TO CERTAIN PEOPLE PER THE CONTRACT.]

SUCCESSORS & ASSIGNS. [AKA – ISAOA – “IT’S SUCCESSORS AND OR ASSIGNS.” … LANGUAGE IS AT THE CERTIFICATION @ PARAGRAPH 7.]

“To (name of insured, if known), (name of lender, if known), (name of insurer, if known), (names of others as negotiated with the client):

This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2026 Minimum Standards Details Requirments for ALTA/NSPS Land Title Surveyors, jointly established ad adopted  by ALTA and NSPS, and includes Items ______ of Table A thereof. The fieldwork was completed on _____[date].

Date of Plat or Map: ______ (Surveyor’s signature, printed name and seal with Registration/License Number)”

2/25/2026 11:47 AM – Originally, the Surveyor was only liable to the person that they did the work for and those that they certified to. But, there was a court case in – perhaps Illinois – which made it that surveyors are liable to anyone who may reasonably rely upon the survey.

DON’T DO ANY UPDATES WITHOUT RESURVEYING!

[You can alter the date only – not add new names.]

Special Circumstances:

“Certain properties or interest in real properties may present issues outside those normally encountered on an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey (e.g., marinas, campgrounds, mobile home parks, easements, leases, mineral interests, other non-fee simple interests). The scope of work related to surveys of such properties or interests in real properties should be discussed with the client, lender, [etc. …].”

2/25/2026 11:59 AM – BREAK FOR LUNCH

2/25/2026 1:30 PM – RETURN FROM LUNCH

MEASUREMENT STANDARDS

2. i. “Relative Positional Precision” is the accepted indicator of measurement quality on an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey. It is defined as the length of the semi-major axis, [etc. …]” This reduces the language from a standard of 2 dimensions to a single dimension of precision.

“Shall” became “Must” in most of the language. Gutierrez v. Millano “a Supreme Court case in which ‘shall’ was not considered an imperative.

“Adjoiner” (the person) v. “the Adjoining Property” – now “Adjoining Property.”

4.A. Records Research – “Given the purpose of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey, complete copies of the most recent title commitment or, if a title commitment is not available, other title evidence satisfactory to the title insurer (if a recent title commitment is not provided, in some case, additional title research may be required on ther part of and by the insurer or on the part of the surveyor due to state law);”

4.C.i. “Any recorded easements, servitudes, or covenants burdening the property to be surveyed; and

[4.C.]ii. Any recorded easements, servitudes, or covenants burdening the property to be surveyed; …

Except, however, if the documents outlined in B and C of this section are not provided to the surveyor or if non-public or quasi-public documents (e.g., highway or railroad plans) are otherwise required to complete the survey, the surveyor must conduct that research [etc. …]

5. Fieldwork – The fieldwork must be performed using practices generally recognized as acceptable by the surveying profession for purposes of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey.

A. Monuments … included the language (including relationship to surface of the ground)  – This means to “find and leave better footsteps.”

B. Rights of way and Access

iii. Evidence of physical access (including vehicular access such as curb cuts, and driveways) to any abutting streets, highways, or other public or private ways observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork. NOTE: THIS LANGUAGE IS REALLY ABOUT VEHICULAR ACCESS.

C. Lines of Possession and Improvements along the Boundaries

i. The character and location of evidence of possession or occupation along the perimeter of the surveyed property, both by the occupants of the surveyed property and by adjointing properties, observed in the process of conducting the field work regardless of proximity to the perimeter boundary. HMM? THIS ACTUALLY MIGHT BE GOOD TO LOOK AT FOR SOME BOUNDARY DISPUTES.

E. EASEMENTS – NOTE THERE IS HEADER LANGUAGE WHICH HAS BEEN ADDED FOR THE POINT OF CLARITY.

i. Evidence of Documented Easements:

ii. Evidence of Undocumented Use (Presciptive Easements)

iii. Indication of Underground Easements:

iv. Evidence of Utilities: … NOTE: This also clarifies height and depth as well as distance from perimeter easement.

6. PLAT or Map – A plat or map of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey must be prepared using practices generally recognized as accept able by the surveying profession for purposes of an ALTA/NSPS LAND Title Survey and shall show the following information. Where dimensioning is appropriate, dimensions shall be annotated to what is, in the surveyor’s professional opinion, the appropriate degee of precision based on (a) the planned use of the surveyed property, if reported in writing to the surveyor by the client, lender, or insurer, or (b) existing use, if the planned use is not so reported.

(l) Notation of any parole statements by interested landowners or occupants as to title or boundary issues relating to the surveyed property.

TABLE A – OPTIONAL SURVEY RESPONSIBILITIES AND SPECIFICATIONS

“NOTE: When any of the first twenty (20) items of Table A are selected, the exact wording of and fee for any selected item, may be negotiated between the surveyor and client. Note that some items may be required by state statute, administrative rule or local ordinance in which case they must be included pursuant to Section 3.B.  [ETC. …]”

15. __   Features, other than the boundary survey portion of an ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey and the location of features in close proximity to a boundary or other title or relevant setback line, may be shown using imagery; however, the surveyor must:

(a) agree with the client in writing on imagery to utilize, including sourse, date and/or versions of imagery, and licensing costs and requirements.

(b) discuss the ramifications of such practices (e.g., the potential accuracy, precision and completeness of the imagery gathered thereby) with the insurer, lender, and client prior to the performance of the survey, and

(c) place a note on the face of the survey explaining the source, date, precision, and other relevant qualifications of any such imagery.

20. __   When observed in the process of conducting the fieldwork or otherwise identified in the process of preparing the survey the following conditions and potential encroachments must be summarized in a table and indicated on the face of the plat or map. Without expressing a statement of legal opinion or an opinin as to ownership, the table must identify the physical conditions, and provide a means by which the conditions can  be readily located on the face of the plat or map by a reviewer; however, this table may not be a comprehensive list of all concerns shown on the plat or map of the survey.

  • Potential encroachments over boundary lines onto the surveyed property from adjoining property and onto adjoining property from the surveyed property.
  • Potential encroachments into rights of way and easements for which written documentation of the existence of such rights of way and easements was provided to or obtained by the surveyor pursuant to Section 4.
  • Potential encroachments of front, side or setbacks, but only whent the setback requirements specific to the surveyed property were provided to the surveyor pursuant to Table A item 6(a)  or 6(b) or provided in recorded documents.
  • Physical access between adjoining parcels without benefit of an easement for which written documentation of the existence of such easements was provided to or obtained by the surveyor pursuant to Section 4.
  • Use of adjoining parcels by apparent occupants of the surveyed property without [etc. …]”

2/25/2026 3:00 PM – Afternoon ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey Standards Session  Concluded

Sent Via Email 2025.08.29

Robert Jacum – rjacum@jsjrlaw.com; Thomas Schukum – tschukum@jsjrlaw.com; Daniel Jive –  djive@jsjrlaw.com.com; August Ron-Yonder – aron-yonder@jsjrlaw.com

Managing & Founding Attorneys, Jacum, Schukum, Jive, and Ron-Yonder, PLLC 666 Diablo Defence Drive, Ste 666 Dead Center, MA 98666

RE: They’s. Jordyn Kapitate – Notice of Discipline | Yucky v. Herald – Pierce Me County Superior Court

Messrs. Jacum, Schukum, Jive, and Ron-Yonder:

I am putting you on notice of the impending discipline notice which I will be filing with the WSBA Ethics committee to assess what I assert to be improprieties of your colleague, associate partner Jordyn Kapitate, as to the errant and yet uncompleted work product regarding Pierce County Superior Court Cause # 07-1-1666-4.

This is a matter which has been long delayed throughout its entire course in large part due to the obtuse client demands relayed by They’s. Kapitate including: (a) unwillingness to consider an exclusive easement; (b) refusal to incorporate a fence in settlements for a feigned claim of its spite; and (c) an extended series of requests for my clients to remove monuments – a misdemeanor per RCW 58.04.015.

Fine! That may be chalked up to merely engaging in zealous advocacy.

What certainly is not fine though is that the final decree submitted to the court was altered … AFTER I HAD SIGNED IT!

This issue appears to initially have been caused when amongst references to the four exhibits of the final decree, I mistakenly altered the lettering of an Exhibit “C” to Exhibit “A.” This scrivener’s error went undetected by both They’s. Kapitate and they’s’s paralegal Comptence Cadaverre.  

Amazingly, Exhibit D was removed both as to the exhibit itself … and its reference within the decree!

In my mind, this change must have occurred in only one of two ways: (a) Ms. Cadaverre made these changes and it went undiscovered by They’s. Kapitate; or (b) They’s. Kapitate made the change they’s-self before sending it back to Ms. Cadaverre for court filing. I believe both are ethical violations.

I need to add that, but for my inquiry as to status, I would not have received service of court papers which were improperly delayed by almost a week!

Because of this inordinate delay in service, I decided to review the papers and discovered these errors and immediately sent an email and left messages on both They’s. Kapitate’s and Ms. Cadaverre’s voicemail not to record the court order. In a follow-up call, I was finally able to reach They’s. Kapitate’s. I told her about these errors and begged her not to record the order. They’s. Kapitate sent an email to Ms. Cadaverre to refrain that day – Friday, 2025.08.08.

Today marks 3 weeks from that day and instead of finalizing this issue, They’s. Kapitate is seeking to extricate they’s-self in increasingly “clever” manner from they’s’ error(s) by first suggesting that this was an issue of the Pierce County Court before then pointing the blame at the computer systems of your firm.

On the remote plausibility that your firm’s computer systems are in fact causing all these issues, I hope the WSBA ethics committee conducts an extensive audit to assure no other parties are impacted.

Now, the fact of the matter is that our clients have respectively hired us to resolve their real property problems and to quiet title. We have not done that. My client now has no legal description. And it could be argued that They’s. Kapitate’s client Mr. Yucky now only has title to a “shapenly unclean” transfer parcel.

Messrs. Jacum, Schukum, Jive, and Ron-Yonder, in that They’s. Kapitate has left on vacation without having closed this matter, I implore you to please identify an honest and competent member of your legal staff to do so TODAY!!!

I want They’s. Kapitate and Ms. Carver removed from this matter and all other matters with me going forward. Perhaps you could replace her with the head of your litigation department instead – Andrew Wisewin.

Notably, in that They’s. Kapitate decided to not execute a CR2A settlement agreement, if we are unable to do so, we will have to open a new quiet title matter. That is not a preferred course.

With the Utmost Sincerity,

/s/ Robert Walter M. Zierman

Robert Walter M. Zierman (He/Him*) / JUSTICE SMILES, pllc

* I reserve all rights to identify as a woman as needed.

** Please be advised that as of Labor Day, 2025.09.01, my pronouns change to (King/Kong).

PS.         There is another matter for which They’s. Kapitate and I are currently opposing counsel. Either the court is still waiting for an amended filing or now even King County eService has a problem too.

Maybe They’s. Kapitate’s “diablo ex machina” excuse about your firm’s systems is correct and has corrupted King County’s eFiling system too.

Quelle Horreur, that would be a lovely mess!

Cc:         tkapitate@jsjrlaw.com; ccadaverre@jsjrlaw.com; awisewin@jsjrlaw.com

PHOTO CREDIT: Wikipedia at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janus

I know. I know. It just isn’t fair!

Well, that’s right … It isn’t.

We would like to think that everything is good. And barring that, at least “I am good.” With the not often missing complement, … “and therefore, if you are not like me, you are bad.”

See, in law there are always no less than 2 contests.

The contest that most people think about is their precious rights. Well, the axiomatic corollary of this is someone else’s responsibility. These are the case merits.

The other contest is the procedural war of attrition attendant to the drawn down resources of money, emotion, and time.

Notably, that order is from least expensive to highest.

While most people think that money is the biggest concern, it’s not … with the right attitude and willingness to learn and act, there is plenty of money. This is the cheapest resource to expend.

The second is emotion. But, for most people unless they have had so much experience with lawyers that they have learned that they are renting someone else’s mind to do all the worrying for them and otherwise let it go, the emotional roller-coaster is going to be one you will never forget.

And then there is time. We all have exactly the same amount of it … the present moment. Do you want to waste that on a petty litigation instead of doing something that you enjoy.

So what’s the answer? In most cases, begrudgingly you have to walk away. You might even have to run.

You want to have justice?

Look to yourself. How can you take responsibility.

Here, I’m not advocating that you take responsibility for things to which you have no relationship. I’ve tried that and it doesn’t work out well.

Do take full responsibility for everything to which you do have an attachment or interest.

This means that if you have a dispute with your neighbor, “own” it.

Take so much responsibility that it is no longer your neighbor’s issue.

Hell, purchase their house, adjust the line, cut the tree, create the view easement, and then sell the property if that’s what it takes.

You can do it! And if you can’t right now, well then I can help you to grow so that you have the ability to do so … as long as you are willing to take action.

“But, I don’t want to!”

Well guess what, I am not attached to you … at least not yet. And, I don’t want to help you to run your life further into the ditch … and take money for the “pleasure” of doing it.

What type of lawyer says that? I don’t know of to many. It’s called the TRUTH.

I want to help my clients in and out of conflict and up to their higher selves as soon as possible.

If that’s something you might like? Well, let’s look to see how I can help you.

If you want to bitch and moan … go take it somewhere else…!

—

Source: Paramount Pictures

Chinatown (1974) is a film which explores corruption and other dark themes that morally ambiguous protagonist Jake Gittes played by Jack Nicholson finally find both illegal and revolting. But, as he is powerless to order change, he must walk away.

Above I have represented two stickpersons in conflict aided by the teachings of my mentors Bob Proctor and Sandra Gallagher of the Proctor Gallagher Institute.

Both represent two parts of the mind – the conscious mind (represented by the upper half of their respective larger circles) and the subconscious mind (represented respectively by those halves below).

Both also have a body represented by the smaller circles.

Moreover, both instead of thinking positively are in a very bad way.

They are both allowing their perspective as to outside circumstances control their thoughts in their respective conscious minds, their respective feelings in their sub-conscious minds, and their actions performed by their bodies.

This is demonstrated by the fact that the negative sign for each of them is circled instead of the positive sign above their respective minds.

But, this is where all the similarities end!

Noticeably the stick person to the left believes that he is entitled to the title line marked as “Y.”

Whereas the stickperson to the right believes that she is entitled to the line of historical use marked as “X.”

In cultivating relationships with some of the country’s foremost surveyors, national leaders such as Gary Kent, Brian Lucas, and Curtis Sumner, there is one idea which is repeatedly hammered home.

If surveyors can only find the problem and are unable to fix it, surveyors are the problem.

Well, the solution is to help clients to move from a triggered place of fear deep within their subconscious which is negative, to a place of knowledge.

Both parties “know” consciously that they are right. An attorney’s job is to assist clients to reconcile this knowledge with legal truth.

What heretofore has gone unrecognized is that the sub-conscious mind, that part which actually controls much more than half of most people’s thoughts and actions, in both parties goes into a state of bewilderment in which the mind is unable to determine which line is correct.

This sets up what my mentors call a “double-binding” message which causes such extremely odd behavior between neighbors.

So, how about real property boundary dispute attorneys? Well, I suggest that the idea for them is very similar to that which is for the surveyors.

If attorneys can only address their clients’ conscious real property disputes, then attorneys are the problem.

See, until the neighbors underlying fears of one another can be harmonized, there is virtually no way in which to come to a solution which doesn’t involve an incredible waste of time, emotion, and financial expense.

And for what? Five Blades of Grass?

Whether you are a surveyor, real estate agent, title insurer, or homeowner, if you are contemplating involvement in the utter irrationalities of a boundary dispute, you really should make sure that you understand the materials provided by the Proctor Gallagher Institute.

Not only will they save you multi-faceted hardship, they will help you to learn how to get anything you seriously want!

Now I would suggest that you make a decision and contact me right away, PGI’s materials can aide in the resolve of any conflict – family, employment, corporate, and even international.

Yet, for those who want to learn more about PGI before doing so, by all means I encourage you to do further study at BoundaryBreakthroughs.com

In either events, have a most spectacular day!

Whether you are currently involved in a boundary dispute with your neighbor or in that period of despondency following the conclusion of your matter, you almost certainly feel had.

Why didn’t your legal counsel tell you at the beginning that you would feel like a spent cartridge laying around at a crime scene after all was said and done?

Not a hard question to answer, either your counsel knew what was going to happen and was willing to suck the venom out of you in the form of money, emotion, and time and went ahead with it anyway … or they didn’t.

A lawyer’s competence at pursuing a matter at court is at best 5% of the contest. The remaining 95% or more is about keeping you convicted in your pursuit.

But, here’s the rub. Attorneys are taught to “think like an attorney.” What does this mean? It means that they are taught to strip out all the emotionality and make the matter a pure intellectual exercise.

The problem with this though is that these problems are never purely an intellectual exercise. In fact, it is rare that they have anything to do with the intellect at all.

Instead, neighbors are seeking to litigate something on the ground vis-a-vis their neighbors as a proxy for something about themselves that they are seeking to litigate with themselves.

Without fail there is a component of fear involved. Fear which when we get right down to it exists on both sides of the often rather small little wedge which is at contest.

That fear can be very focused toward a neighbor who is perceived to be acting aggressively or without any focus other than if I give up on this my other neighbors will no longer respect me.

Sure there are other outlets of fear which may be the manifested cause of the issue in between these, but ultimately the concern does relate to fear.

The ironic thing is that though many attorneys who regularly practice in this proceed to lead their keep like sheep to slaughter because their clients are fearful of being fleeced by their neighbor, the contest in the vast majority of cases is going to cost more than the value of the land ever could.

So people get to that point of “tap-out” and they have to now negotiate a truce with the opposing side. What an abject waste.

Why should attorneys gain in a situation which is best akin to the Vietnam idea that ‘we had to destroy the village, in order to save the village?’

The attorneys essentially come in and by drawing down the resources of the respective sides, take all the will to legally fight out.

The neighbors relationship is now completely destroyed. Again, what a waste!

So, what to do to recover after your cartridge has been spent and the lawyers are gone?

It’s time to rebuild. Rebuild yourself in such a way that a matter like this will never come up again.

At minimum, that means taking precaution as you move seek to purchase any property.

I would add though, that what it really means is to figure out a way to move beyond fear.

The fact that you got yourself into a situation in which you likely spent well north of $10,000 is highly suggestive that being able to eliminate fear is something that you really value.

The elimination of unhealthy fear is something that is attainable. And if you are a ‘spent cartridge’ it is highly likely that it is necessary.

That being the case, I encourage you to switch out of the hell of litigating with your fear line at the margins and instead go for what you really want.

What do you really want? That’s something that you might not have the answer to as of yet, but working on helping you figure that out and then going out and making it a reality is now my line of work.

I spent far too much time helping neighbors from mauling each other like big cats on the savannah. My aim is to help people quickly move past that miserable stage of life so they can refocus their formidable strengths not on protecting “Five Blades of Grass,” but rather using it to make meaningful changes in their lives.

So, if you haven’t sorted out your neighbor boundary dispute mess, let me help you do that and get you to a spot far beyond your current condition.

To do so, I invite you to click on over to start learning how you can initiate your own Boundary Breakthroughs [HERE].

—

Photo Credit: Jaco-Mari Futcher at https://randfonteinherald.co.za/280296/update-attempted-robbery-turns-shooting-cbd/.

This year I concluded my real property boundary dispute law practice. The misery of neighbors engaging attorneys as mercenaries to fight at “Try-All” has been an absurdity throughout that full run. But for many people, land issues can trigger ‘animal spirits.’ And just as the case with big cats on the savannah, neither the victor nor the vanquished ends unmauled. What a waste!

Why did I stay in this environment for so long? Well, in addition to the fact that it is just plain hard to get out, I had a vision of how to make the law – at least in this arena – more instantly cognizable.

With this cognizance, comes both vastly increased case research and prediction. How so? Smartly, I finally sought out the expertise of Data Literacy’s Ben Jones. In less than two full day’s work, Ben was able to whip up my Tableau Software data visualization project.

This was a project which I had conceived almost 30 years ago in college; secured an independent study unit 15 years ago in law school to graduate a 1/2 semester early notwithstanding my then inchoate write-up; and published 6 years ago this month in the King County Bar Bulletin – not at all incidentally the same month that Tableau Software went public.

See http://www.kcba.org/newsevents/barbulletin/archive/2013/05/article18.htm .

At present these data visualizations stand textually unaided at the website my friends at LexBlog built out for me. So, here my LinkedIn friends and associates, I would like to share a few thoughts about the theory I seek to apply and how this is represented in the two data visualizations themselves which are now live at JusticeSmiles.com.

Overall, the area of boundary dispute law has been an ideal sandbox to seek to bring the insights of data visualization to law because while it is an intensively fact driven case arena, there is a manageable universe of published cases which are decision not based on which rule rules, but on the facts.

The overarching idea is that each case fact serves as a data point. An aggregate of any case facts in turn rolls up to case holdings which in turn itself serve as a data point. So, by “scoring” each case as to the presence of their facts as well as how the cases were decisioned we can “view” aggregate and specific fact strengths.

At JusticeSmiles.com, the “Fact Aggregate” visualization shows how increasing the number of (unweighted) facts increases the likelihood of a case toggling from an invalid adverse possession claim – which is shown in red – to a valid claim — which is shown in light and dark green.

True, that’s a pretty obvious insight, but the potential comes into play when greater numbers of cases are pushed through the case scoring funnel and case weightings can be determined.

What do I mean by this business of case weightings? Think of it this way. If someone regularly mowed grass beyond an inaccurate title line, that fact probably doesn’t bear much weight. If they have a drive or roadway for which the seam is beyond the title line, the weight of that fact is greater. Tipping the scales most completely then is the weight which occurs when a house extends beyond the title line.

(As an aside, the Washington Supreme Court’s majority effectively decided in Proctor v. Huntington, that the build of a house beyond the property line was so strong that they would loosen up on the enforcement of the 10 year statute of limitations period required for all other claimants of adverse possession to validate their claims. Proctor v. Huntington is certainly not a case of “go big or go home” … it’s a case of “go big and go home!)

Returning to “Fact Aggregates,” we have things interactively organized based on courts, fence, land and water. The default courts showing has the two Washington Supreme Court cases at the top, followed by the division one, two, and three jurisdiction appellate cases.

Use Tableau’s interactivity at the top to switch to fences and you will see case divisions based on no fence, partial fence, full line fence, and a full enclosure fence. Notice that without the fence, there are still four cases in which only one or two facts were necessary to prove adverse possession and as such “go green.”

Why’s that? Those cases are all agricultural cases (whereas Bryant is actually the Timber lands case (we’ll get that swapped, if not already by the time your eyes hit this line in nested parens)). Moving on, the other three scored categories for the land cases are urban and suburban; exurban and vacation; and remote or mountainous. The reason this is important is because different land types require lesser and greater degrees of notice to satisfy adverse possession claimants’ element of “open and notorious.”

Why water cases? There are two reasons, for surveyors these are much more technically complex at the level of high math. For lawyers, while the parties are often more legally sophisticated, they also generally have more money to invest in their legal project and so these legal lines generally fully litigated by counsel of equivalent strength – i.e. let the blood sport begin!

Ok, switching to the “Fact Specific” visualizations, please find that all of those factors are interactive so that with a touch of the mouse, one can find all the cases in say Division I and determine their case disposition again by the color red or green and whether a back or forward slash.

What’s this business about the slashed lines? Well those cases (which were depicted with lighter colors) in the “Fact Aggregates” viz indicate that the matter had to go to trial to be decided. By contrast, full (robust) lines represent those cases which were so strong that they were decided at summary judgment – i.e. without the need of wasting anyone’s time with a trial because it’s so blatantly obvious who is going to prevail – or are now a new legal standard because the Washington Supreme Court decided them.

What’s next for legal visualizations at this small corner of the legal world. I anticipate after getting my new mediation blog – BoundaryBreakthroughs.com – and a relaunch of – BoundaryDisputeLaw.com – as my consulting and expert witness blog, we might get in place visualizations which indicate those other fact specifics which drive the cases like grass mowing, storage, gardens, landscaping, eaves overhang, etc.

Those facts demand volume to start depicting results and where will that volume come from. If lawyers were willing to make the commitment to populate that information, it would be spectacular. But while I think some really industrious crew may want to pick up the torch for their family law, wills contest, UCC Article 3 commercial paper, or any other high volume arena and corner the market, I’m not so sure we will have all that many people tripping head over heals to populate boundary dispute law.

But, heck beyond the other misfits that find themselves “Groundhog Day(ing)” their lives away in this practice area that I am sidestepping, there might actually be some passionate young associates cutting their civ pro teeth on these matters who are willing to cross the legal chasm from laggards to join those “reasonably” respectable classed society members comprising the late majority. In that way, these young associates may actually jump the que a little bit quicker out of Boundary Dispute “Fun Land” to attain their well deserved post of non-equity partnership.

More promisingly for those in data viz land, we may get a fair amount of that information from mediation clients, but in those cases much more creative remedies can be placed on the table. The upshot by unqualified definition is that the resulting lines in those matter aren’t fully litigated.

But there is an area where the information is decided and not currently captured which would really help. These are the decisions made on these cases at the trial court level. True, those cases don’t have precedential value. But, they certainly do have value which goes beyond the two disputants tying up the court’s most precious resource of time. Here’s how.

Say we have 20 cases throughout the state in which the facts are all limited to these two – (1) a fence line exists up to which (2) a lawn was regularly mowed. Well, if 17 cases spin out for the claimant of adverse possession and only 3 did not … what is likely to happen with your case with those same facts?

For those seeking to hue to the title line, it would be so much better to know that they will likely lose than to pay $25,000 and on the eve of a summary judgment motion when the judge will likely not only throw out their case, but very well might shift attorney’s fees and costs based on intransigence, it would be so much better to know how the law is going to spin out and just get the thing resolved … don’t ya think?

Note: Concurrent LinkedIn Publishing at my profile ) Republishing of 2014.05.04

Fill or Kill. Yes, it’s the lore of James Dean in Rebel without a Cause. 

But, it’s really onto only what I call endpoint thinking … it’s deadpoint thinking.

Consider a game of chicken in which two drivers barrelling down on eachother finds one, or possibly both, yanking out the driver’s wheel and throwing it out the window so the other driver will sway or yield course.

But then what? The car(s) without a driving wheel quite likely will end up ditch bound with driver thrown through the windshield.

Well what about the brakes? It’s quite possible that slamming on the breaks caused the car to spin out of control and then flip before coming to a rest.

So here’s the question for plausible pro se litigants of boundary disputes:

Do you think that throwing the equivalent of your steering wheel – i.e. your mental faculties – out the window is really going to be a productive way in which to resolve your boundary dispute issue?

The answer is an emphatic: NO! Don’t do it!

You will look back and realize how much of a fool you have been.

You will look back and realize how much emotional damage you have done to yourself and your neighbors.

You will look back and realize how much money you have needlessly spent.

Most importantly, you will look back and realize you have frittered valuable time away to assuage what Bono (and later Johnny Cash) sang in the song One as “the lepers in your head.” [1] & [2].

What a complete waste of time! When Justice Smiles tells anyone be it a prospective client or the neighbor in a writing that they don’t stand a chance …

Don’t think that throwing out the steering wheel will in any way diminish the merits of your case.

Just thank me for the fact that I am willing to pound a little bit of sense into you instead of cutting your soul out of you.

Point your will to win in a useful direction and realize that you have infinite potential which will allow you to yield real results where it really counts … putting money into your pocket instead of bleeding it out in a needless boundary dispute.

—

Photo Credit: https://florianbieber.org/2015/02/13/rebel-with-a-cause-greeces-chicken-game/

[1] Enjoy Bono’s One [HERE].

[2] Enjoy Johnny Cash’s One [HERE].