NM Surveyor’s Conference 2022- Federal Cases Quiz

Quiz Summary

0 of 6 Questions completed

Questions:

You have already completed the quiz before. Hence you can not start it again.

Quiz is loading…

You must sign in or sign up to start the quiz.

You must first complete the following:

Results

Quiz complete. Results are being recorded.

Results

0 of 6 Questions answered correctly

Your time:

You have reached 0 of 0 point(s), (0)

Current
Review
Answered
Correct
Incorrect

Question 1 of 6

1. Question
What was the main issue in the Weyerhaeuser case?
- An overlap was created because of two independent surveys
- Closing corners were not properly recovered in a resurvey
- A hiatus occurred because of a deficient resurvey
- Weyerhaeuser’s GLO patent was void
Correct

Incorrect
Question 2 of 6

2. Question
Which of the following statements are correct?
- Neither line controls, because neither of them marks a true parallel of latitude, so the line between these townships must be properly run, to determine the true extent of all of the relevant sections.
- The 1855 line controls, because it is the senior line, and the line of 1896 must be disregarded as a false line, which was created only as a result of gross error on the part of the 1896 surveyor.
- The 1896 line controls, because the fact that the 1896 surveyor could not find the 1855 monuments indicates that the line of 1855 was grossly erroneous, rendering the older line a legal nullity.
- Both lines control, 2 township boundaries exist, and a genuine gap exists between those lines, because both GLO surveyors were duly authorized to set township line monuments and they both did so.
Correct

Incorrect
Question 3 of 6

3. Question
Was the 1896 GLO surveyor negligent?
- Partially- he should have made a more diligent search for the 1855 corners
- Yes-because the government never intended for there to be two township lines
- Yes-because the 1896 surveyor exceeded his authority
- No- the 1896 surveyor made an honest attempt to complete his assignment
Correct

Incorrect
Question 4 of 6

4. Question
Why were the 1896 monuments not treated as closing corners?
- Error committed during an original survey is no error at all, original GLO monuments are free of error of any nature
- Since Weyerhaeuser had received a patent, moving the 1855 monuments to close on the 1896 survey line would have violated their Bona Fide rights.
- The 1896 monuments were placed too far away from the intended line to be of use
- The 1855 monuments where the actual closing corners
Correct

Incorrect
Question 5 of 6

5. Question
Why did Macmillan think she owned lots 5 through 8 in section 31?
- Because they are part of section 31
- In a letter to the Surveyor General of Nevada, the Commissioner of the GLO said that the four lots were added to section 31 as compensation for shortages elsewhere
- She may have been unaware of the 1921 survey
- Russel prevailed because of his senior Bona Fide rights
- All of the above
Correct

Incorrect
Question 6 of 6

6. Question
Why didn’t Macmillan own lots 5 through 8?
- She had no right to rely on the 1921 plat
- The south boundary of her section 31 was conclusively defined by the 1893 monumentation
- The 1902 patent given to the railroad was based on the 1893 plat
- All of the above
Correct

Incorrect

NM Surveyor’s Conference 2022- Federal Cases Quiz

NM Surveyor’s Conference 2022- Federal Cases Quiz

Quiz Summary

Information

Results

Results

Categories

1. Question

2. Question

3. Question

4. Question

5. Question

6. Question