Counsel for the defendants emphasized that the descriptions quoted above limited the title of the owners of the seat of Mill No. 12 to the bank (or banks) of the river. However, the majority rejected this interpretation, concluding that the descriptions given to Cobb and Morgan would extend title to the center of the Genesee River. Disputes often arise over ownership of gaps and goeurs when they are discovered, usually when developers determine sufficient value in the local country. Local laws determine whether they are considered abandoned or whether they are more related (or can be absorbed by) one or another neighboring plot. For example, in Tennessee law, tax card boundaries can become property boundaries (regardless of a survey and deed to the contrary) by paying taxes on the land for twenty years believing it was part of the property, even if it includes adjacent spaces and ditches. See opposing obsession. Both parties determined that the title of the original 100-acre description extended to the center of the Genesee River – a small, non-navigable river. The final issue was to determine ownership of the Genesee River bed on the basis of the subsequent division of the mother parcel. In the old English law, a gore was a small, narrow strip of land.
In modern land law and surveying, a gore is a strip of land that is usually triangular, as it can be left between surveys that are not closed. In some states in the northeastern United States (primarily northern New England), a gore (sometimes a grant or purchase of land) remains an unincorporated area of a county that is not part of a city, has limited self-government,[1] and may be uninhabited. It is the responsibility of land use experts to read each document in light of the circumstances of its execution and to trace the act in accordance with the intention of the original parties. Courts regularly apply legal presumptions such as those described above, especially for ambiguous descriptions. The Strip & Gore doctrine is considered a legitimate «construction rule» and is just as legitimate as other more well-known rules. Although we try to maintain the security of the Website, we do not guarantee that the Website will be secure or that use of the Website will be uninterrupted. Please note that the information on this website may sometimes be inaccurate, incomplete or out of date. In addition, third parties may make unauthorized changes to the Site. If you become aware of any unauthorized changes made to the Site by a third party, please contact us with a description of the material in question and the URL or location of such material. We assume no responsibility for the completeness, accuracy or timeliness of the information on this site. A second charter dated the same date transferred the remainder of the headquarters of Plant 12 to Thomas Morgan and contained the following description of the property: «Beginning at the southwest corner of the site transferred to Cobb, extends southerly from thence along the eastern boundaries of the yard of the 25-foot mill; thence easterly along the northern edge of an alley and parallel to Buffalo Street to the Genesee River (nearly fifty feet); thence northerly along the banks of the Genesee River to William Cobb`s Corner. Again, there is a clear lack of clarity in the description of the river line.
* Not classified as a census-designated place by the United States Census, but legally classified as a minor civil division by the state of Maine 6. Limitation. The Site and all goods, services, content, information and materials (including third party goods, services, content, information and materials) made available through or in connection with the Site are provided to you «as is» without any express representations or warranties of any kind, and each of the Gore Entities disclaims all representations or warranties, statutory or implied. Terms and Conditions relating to the Website and all goods, services, content, information and materials (including third party goods, services, content, information and materials) made available through or in connection with the Website, including any representations or warranties of satisfactory quality, merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, non-infringement of the rights and titles of third parties. You agree that you should evaluate the use of the Site and assume all risks associated with it, including reliance on the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any material available on the Site. Historically, North American named gores were mainly the result of mistakes when the land was first surveyed and land patents from colonial times and later cities were created. A gore would result from contradictory surveys, resulting in two or more patent holders claiming the same land, or being located in an area between two supposedly adjacent cities, but technically in neither. The surrounding towns are known to absorb gore – for example, between Tunbridge and Royalton, Vermont, gore was eventually incorporated into Tunbridge. Some Gores became independent cities, such as Stannard, Vermont.
That of Starr v. Kind is quite simple. A parcel of land of one hundred hectares was divided into several plots by two partition documents. The description of 100 hectares was proposed by both the plaintiff and the defendant as the source of title. The Genesee River was one of the boundaries of this area and was mentioned in the description of «Mill Seat Lot No. 12». The presumption against the transfer of narrow and unnecessary strips of land is a legitimate consideration for the court, but there are many exceptions to this doctrine. These presumptions are rebuttable and may be rebutted where there is substantial evidence to suggest that the presumption is not appropriate in the circumstances.
In addition, different States differ in the application of this doctrine – particularly in the description of land adjacent to railway tracks. The United States District Court in Idaho considered a railroad right that had been converted to road use and concluded: «The transfer of strips of land for a fee is disadvantaged in some states for reasons of public policy and therefore gives rise to the presumption that the transfer of a strip of land is an easement rather than a charge. This is commonly referred to as the «strip and gore doctrine.» However, the Idaho Supreme Court explicitly refused to apply the doctrine of strip-and-gore to railroad documents. [12] As in the case discussed in 2012, the Senter Trusts raised the issue of «ambiguity» as a precondition for the application of the doctrine. Senter Trusts asserted that the doctrine of strip-and-gore only applies when there is uncertainty or ambiguity about the land to be transferred. The court rejected this argument because subsequent cases have concluded that ambiguity in the description of a property is not a doctrine. The description of the Cobb Tract (part of Mill-Seat 12) included the phrase «thence easterly parallel to Buffalo Street, approximately 45 feet from the Genesee River; thence northerly along the banks of the said river to Buffalo Street. There is an obvious ambiguity in this language.