WATERS

Document Sample
WATERS Powered By Docstoc
					                                    WATERS
                                    INTRODUCTION

Florida has more land that involves bodies of water or water related problems as a part of
the land's title than any other state in the United States. Not only is there the enormous
coastline stretching from Duval County down the east coast and through the Florida Keys
and up along the west coast around the panhandle and to Pensacola; additionally, Florida
has many inland lakes, most of which are natural bodies of water, but some are artificial.
Additionally, most of the inland areas consist of swamp and overflowed lands that have
been conveyed by the United States Government to the State of Florida and then to
private parties.

The examiner's job is to trace the chain of title for all real estate title examinations. Here,
in addition to the chain of title the examiner must be concerned with 1) the authority of
the sovereign to convey at the time of the conveyance: and 2) the area of land conveyed
by the conveyance. Where the land being conveyed consists of land with a water
boundary (or contained submerged lands itself) the examiner must be concerned with
changes in the water boundary be they natural changes or artificial changes.

As most conveyances from the sovereign occurred many years ago, the only evidence the
title examiner now has is his or her knowledge of the present make up of the property
being examined as well as what will appear of record in the abstract or chain of title since
the date of conveyance from the sovereign. Such things as maps, plats, or descriptions in
deeds of conveyance must be scrutinized.

Changes in the water boundary because of natural or artificial accretions or relictions; or
artificial fill which increased or diminished the area of uplands will have happened since
the time of the deed out from the State.

The examiner will utilize the tools of analyzing the instruments in the chain of title to
determine whether or not the present water boundary is in a similar location to that
contained in conveyances in the chain of title and that the size of the parcel of la nd is the
same. The United States Government Survey will always give us a dimension as to size
of the original parcel to work from. As discussed later, a surveyor's certificate locating
and describing the various legal descriptions in the chain of title is an important tool to
utilize.

This discussion is intended for the purpose of examining the title to undeveloped property
which has not been previously insured. If you have a prior title insurance policy which
you have in your possession which insures title to the lands being examined, after you
have completed your title examination obtain the written approval of the Company to
issue the proposed title insurance commitment.

           LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE WATER BOUNDARY
Ask yourself where was and where is the boundary of our property. This is easy where
we do not abut a body of water or have a body of water which either flows through or is
located within the property that we are asked to insure. What if the body of water dries
up? What if there is artificial fill placed in the submerged lands or low lying lands
creating uplands?

Did the boundary change because the mean high water mark moved? Did the boundary
change because an erosion control line plat was recorded pursuant to Florida Statute 161?
Is the present water boundary beyond the meander line shown on the government survey.

CONSIDER THE ABOVE POSSIBILITIES WHERE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION
RUNS TO THE WATER BOUNDARY. AFTER AN ARTIFICIAL FILL OR OTHER
CHANGE OCCURS, THE NEXT CONVEYANCE WOULD CONVEY MORE LAND
THAN THE PREVIOUS CONVEYANCE. DO WE HAVE TITLE TO THE
ADDITIONAL LANDS?

Certainly the customer wants insurance of all the property that was conveyed. The
Company does not want to insure any part of lands where the location of the water
boundary is questionable; either because of a prior history that is not clear or, we are
unable to locate the mean high water line if sovereignty lands either border or are located
within the property to be insured.

                THE CONVEYANCE FROM THE TRUSTEES

When Florida was admitted to the United States in March of 1845, the State of Florida
became the owner of all sovereignty lands (as same is defined herein) by virtue of its
admission. But otherwise, the State of Florida became the owner of all lands existing at
that time under navigable bodies of water. The title to all uplands was vested either in the
United States of America or private persons to the extent that they would have received
private grants either from the United States of America or a foreign Country (Spain,
England, or France) during times when these Countries had control over the Florida
territory. In 1850, Congress, by virtue of the "Swamp and Overflowed Lands Act" as
defined herein, thereafter caused to be conveyed by patent to the State of Florida different
areas designated as swamp and overflowed lands.

It is the purpose of this material to provide information as to the times since 1845 when
the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund (the Trustees) have had legislative
authority to convey both swamp and overflowed lands and sovereignty lands. Subject to
the matters discussed herein, the Company is willing to insure title to lands of this nature
so long as there was clear statutory authority for the conveyance and the conveyance is in
proper form.

The examiner must inquire as to the nature of the lands at the time of the conveyance
from the Trustees. The deed from the Trustees must state the statutory authority for the
conveyance. Many times the deed will recite the nature of the lands i.e. "a parcel of
submerged lands", a parcel of "swamp and overflowed lands." If the deed does not, then
further investigation must be made either of the conveyance file in Tallahassee or through
independent means (i.e., a soil test). The other problem with conveyances of this nature is
the location of the present boundary line of said conveyance in relation to the original
surveyed boundary line.

There are many cases decided by the Florida Supreme Court which hold that if there is
proper statutory authority the Trustees may convey sovereignty lands, so long as the
applicable statute has been complied with, there is a determination that the conveyance
was in the public interest and there is no attempt by the Trustees to give up the sovereign
rights of the State in and to the entire body of water. The Court is saying that limited
disposition may be made of lands of this nature. You are to obtain written underwriting
approval from the Company to insure any conveyance of sovereignty lands with an
acreage of more than 2 acres.

TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND (THE
   TRUSTEES) -SUMMARY OF TRUSTEE'S POWER TO MAKE
                   CONVEYANCES OF

                                        Definitions

1. SOVEREIGNTY LANDS - Lands beneath navigable bodies of water existing at the
time of admission of Florida as a State to the United States in 1845 or which thereafter by
natural means became lands under such navigable bodies of waters. Sovereignty lands
also will include lands which were beneath navigable bodies of water in 1845 and which
thereafter became exposed by artificial means. Title to these lands which were exposed
by artificial means remained in the State of Florida.

       It is said that these lands were and are held "in trust" by the State of
       Florida for the benefit of the public and could not be conveyed except in
       certain limited situations. The Trustees did not acquire title to and
       jurisdiction to deal with lands of this nature until different legislative acts
       were passed commencing in 1913 and culminating in 1969 when the
       Trustees were given complete control and ability to convey under
       Statutory requirements all forms of sovereignty lands. The discussions in
       this material will identify those types of land which were subject to
       conveyance at different periods of time.

       The examiner can identify sovereignty lands as opposed to swamp and
       overflowed lands by facts set forth on the official United States
       Government Survey. These surveys were prepared under direction of the
       United States Survey General (mostly in the 1800's) in which a surveyor
       was authorized to survey and locate the various township s (and the
       sections therein) in the State of Florida. When conducting the survey, the
       surveyor was instructed to "meander" any body of water which in his
       determination was a navigable body of water. By meandering, the
       surveyor would depict same on his survey with meandering lines in the
       general location of the water body and the area of land in the section(s) in
       which the body of water was contained would be adjusted to indicate the
       quantity of land which would not constitute the bed of the navigable body
       of water. It is by this concept that he expressed the difference between
       sovereignty lands and swamp and overflowed lands. The remaining
       swamp and overflowed lands would be identified as "fractional sections"
       or "government lots" and would contain acreage references of less than
       640 acres in their total for the entire section.

2. SWAMP AND OVERFLOWED LANDS - Swamp lands as distinguished from
overflowed lands are lands that required drainage to dispose of needless water or
moisture on or in the land in order to make them fit for successful and useful cultivation.
Overflowed lands are those that are covered by non-navigable waters, or are subject to
such periodical or frequent overflows of water, salt or fresh (not including lands between
high and low water marks of navigable streams or bodies of water nor lands covered and
uncovered by the ordinary daily levy flow of normal tides of navigable water), as may
require drainage or levies or embankments to keep out the water and thereby render the
land suitable for successful cultivation.

       Lands of this nature were granted by patents to the State of Florida
       pursuant to Act of Congress approved September 28, 1950 (Swamp and
       Overflowed Lands Act). Title to these lands became vested in the Trustees
       in 1855, and have been the subject of many conveyances to private
       citizens.

3. RECLAIMED LANDS - Lands that at some time in the past ceased being covered by
navigable waters because of man made (artificial) efforts which caused the waters to
permanently recede.

4. ARTIFICIALLY FILLED IN LANDS - Lands formerly covered by navigable water at
the time of or since Florida became a State which thereafter became uncovered by man's
efforts (artificially filling in to remove the water, or artificial accretions).

5. ARTIFICIAL FILL - The condition of the soil on the land which after soil tests by a
surveyor or a geologist will disclose that the top soil was not placed on the land naturally.

6. THE TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND (THE
TRUSTEES) - The Trustees were created in 1855 by Legislative Act. The Trustees
consist of the sitting members of the Florida Cabinet.

The chart set forth below identifies by different periods of time when conveyances from
the Trustees are insurable as to different types of lands. Subject to the discussion herein,
you may insure swamp and overflowed lands conveyances regardless of the amount of
land conveyed by deed unless there is present information available which would disclose
the possibility of sovereignty lands being within or abutting the legal description.
Conveyances of other types of lands which are submerged by description containing
more than 2 acres must be reviewed with the Company before the title insurance
commitment is issued.

Dates of Conveyances from        Only conveyances of swamp and
Trustees                         overflowed lands are insurable subject to
                                 the examiner's determination that the deed
                                 of conveyance conveyed lands of this
                                 nature and that the conveyance did not also
1. 1855 - 05/21/17 (Except       include what would then be sovereignty
in Dade and Palm Beach           lands. If in doubt do not delete the
County 1855 to 06/05/13)         sovereignty lands exception or if you
and (except in Monroe            encounter attempted conveyances of
County 1855 to 06/02/15)         sovereignty lands for which there was no
                                 statutory authority, review the Trustees
                                 deed with Underwriting Counsel for your
                                 area of the State.

2. From the dates set forth at   Conveyances of swamp and overflowed
1 above to 05/29/51              lands are insurable subject to the caveat set
                                 forth above. To the extent that sovereignty
                                 lands as defined at Chapter 7304 (1917)
                                 were conveyed, the conveyance is insurable
                                 to the extent of the lands conveyed,
                                 otherwise the conveyance must be
                                 questioned.

                                 This section provides that the title to all
                                 islands, sandbars, shallow banks or small
                                 islands made in the process of dredging of
                                 the channel of the United States
                                 Government located in tidal waters. . . or
                                 other islands, sandbars, and shallow banks
                                 upon which the water is not more than three
                                 feet deep at high tide and which are
                                 separated from the shore by a channel or
                                 channels, not less than five feet deep at high
                                 tide, or sandbars and shallow banks upon
                                 which the water is not more than three feet
                                 deep at high tide and which are separated
                                 from the shore by a channel or channels,
                                 not less than five feet deep at high tide, or
                                 sandbars and shallow banks along the
                                 shores of the main land. . . in which the title
                                 is not at this date vested in prior parties, is
                          vested in the Trustees.

                          If you determine from the Trustees deed
                          itself or the conveyance file in Tallahassee
                          that the deed was executed pursuant to
                          Section 7304, the conveyance is insurable
                          to the extent of the lands conveyed.




3. 06/09/19 to 05/29/51   Conveyances of reclaimed sovereignty
                          lands pursuant to Chapter 7891 (1919) are
                          insurable. If you determine from the
                          Trustees deed or the conveyance file in
                          Tallahassee that the deed was executed
                          pursuant to Chapter 7891 the conveyance is
                          insurable to the extent of the lands
                          conveyed.

4. 05/29/51 to 06/05/69   Swamp and overflowed lands, conveyances
                          of reclaimed lands, conveyances of
                          sovereignty lands also now including all
                          forms of tidal salt water submerged lands if
                          done in compliance with the statute in the
                          public interest, are insurable; subject to
                          review with the underwriting office for
                          your area of the State as to conveyance of
                          submerged sovereignty lands. The Trustee's
                          deed or the conveyance file in Tallahassee
                          must reflect that the deed was executed
                                pursuant to Chapter 26776 (1951), also
                                known as Florida Statute 253.12.




5. 06/05/69 to present          Sovereignty fresh water navigable lakes are
                                included in the types of submerged lands
                                conveyable by the Trustees in addition to
                                those lands described in (4).


The above described statutes relate to deeds from the Trustees of the Internal
Improvement Trust Fund. These Statutes do not address legislative grants or titles
perfected under the Butler Act, Chapter 8337, effective June 1, 1921 which was repealed
in 1951 in all Counties except Dade and Palm Beach; and in 1957 in Dade and Palm
Beach Counties. Filled lands situations are discussed in the next section on "Filled in
Lands".

                         ARTIFICIALLY FILLED IN LANDS

The general Underwriting Guide on this section contains a discussion at paragraph 15C
on insuring land that was once covered by water and relates to the Federal Navigational
Servitude and/or the State's Public Trust Doctrine.

In addition to acquiring title to submerged or filled in lands by conveyance from the
Trustees, the Florida legislature provided by Chapter 8537, laws of 1921 (The Butler Act)
for the ability of the upland owner to acquire title to adjacent submerged lands lying upon
a navigable stream or bay of the sea or harbor, as far as the edge of the channel, by filling
or permanently improving the submerged lands. The Statute provides that it would effect
only those submerged lands actually bulkheaded or filled in permanently continuously
from the high water mark in the direction of the channel. The Statute became effective
June 1, 1921. It was repealed when Chapter 26776 was enacted in 1951 except in Dade
and Palm Beach Counties where it continued until 1957 when Chapter 57-362 was
enacted.

How do we establish that the fill or improvement occurred during the term of the Butler
Act? As time passes it becomes harder to establish the time of filling. Florida Statute
253.129 requires the Trustees to provide a disclaimer or quit claim deed which has the
effect of evidencing the fill under the Butler Act. The Florida Administrative Code
contains a procedure for applying for disclaimers where the fill occurred under the Butler
Act.
If filled in lands are involved, the Company's requirements for insuring title to filled in
lands or permanently improved lands based upon compliance with the Butler Act, in
addition to identifying the proper present legal description, are as follows:

       1. A disclaimer or quit claim deed from the Trustees; and

       2. Review of aerial photographs if available showing the land before as
       well as after the fill; and

       3. The fill permit form the Corp. of engineers of the United States Army;
       and the State of Florida (where applicable); and

       4. Review of the applicable bulkhead line plat to verify the extent and
       nature of the fill in relation thereto;

               On July 1, 1993 F.S. 253.12(9) was amended to provide for
               a statutory disclaimer, under certain conditions, as to lands
               filled before July 1, 1975. For a complete discussion on
               these amendments, see Title Alert 93-10 dated June 14,
               1993.

However, filled in lands seaward of the Erosion Control Line resulting from the extension
seaward of beaches pursuant to the Erosion Control program created under Florida
Statute 161 are not insurable.

                            Presently Submerged Lands

If there has been or is to be a conveyance from the Trustees to private individuals of
submerged sovereignty which have not been filled, Schedule B of the commitment must
contain the following:

       a) The commitment and policy to be issued does not and should not be
       construed to insure the right to fill or place improvements in the
       submerged lands described in Schedule A (or Schedule C) without first
       having complied with all applicable local, State and Federal requirements.

       b) Rights of the public to use the water above the submerged land for
       boating, fishing and other public uses.

       c) The policy is subject to the rights of the United States of America by
       virtue of its interest in navigation and commerce and of the State of
       Florida by virtue of its inalienable rights in and to lands of this nature.

       d) Determine that the conveyance complies (or complied with) the
       applicable Florida Statutes for conveyance of lands of this nature.
       e) The request to insure the submerged lands must be part of insurance of
       title to adjacent uplands. If not, the Company will decline to insure title to
       the submerged lands.

You must first obtain written permission to issue the commitment from the Company
regardless of the amount of insurance being requested if the amount of submerged lands
exceeds two acres.

WHERE WAS THE BOUNDARY LINE OF THE CONVEYANCE FROM
          THE TRUSTEE? WHERE IS IT TODAY?

If we determine that the Trustees conveyance is insurable, then the question is where is
the present location of the boundary line. Alternatively, we may find that in addition to or
separate from any such conveyance, title would be claimed to filled in lands based upon a
disclaimer or deed pursuant to the Butler Act. The same question arises. Remember the
Coastal Petroleum v. American Cyanamid decision of the Florida Supreme Court, 492
So.2d 339 (Fla. 1986) discussed later in this Guide raises the issue of whether the U.S.
Government survey boundaries as to sovereignty lands are binding on the State of
Florida.

Where you are examining the title to a legal description which (1) is all or part of a
fractional section, government lot etc. (which shows a navigable water body as its
boundary) or constitutes all or part of same in a new description, or (2) you know from
your own knowledge or from reviewing the instruments in the chain of title that there is
or was a water body involved as part of the boundary and you desire not to raise part
(b)(iii) of the sovereignty lands exception; Require.

In order to consider a modification of exception - of Schedule B, the Company should be
finished with a surveyor's certificate and survey as to (1) and (2) or a geologist's report as
to (1) and survey as to (2), at no cost to Chicago Title Insurance Company, which
certifies to the Company:

       (1) That no part of the lands described in the title commitment have been
       created by other than natural means; or constitute accretions thereto; or are
       or were reclaimed or submerged sovereignty lands being lands formerly
       under navigable water or non-navigable subject to the ebb and flow of the
       tide; and

       (2) locates on the survey all record water boundaries, including those
       found on the Government Survey of the property being insured and any
       Erosion Control Lines, and locating same within the present boundary.
       Further that upon review of the survey and certificate, the title
       commitment will be subject to such further exceptions as the Company
       may then deem necessary.
The Company wants to insure title only to that part of the property which is landward of
the present high water line and not submerged lands for which a valid deed trustees deed
has not been given, if there have been no artificial fills or artificially created lands. If the
surveyor tells us that there are artificially created lands for which there is no other valid
Trustees deed or a disclaimer under the "Butler Act" we will modify the legal description
to exclude these lands or take the sovereignty lands exception.

Survey coverage (deletion of General Exception 2) as to the present location of the
present mean high water line should not be given unless the surveyor has prepared a
special survey (Mean High Water Line Survey) and it has been reviewed by Regional
Counsel or his designee.

                                       EXCEPTION

The following Exception (1) is to be placed in Schedule B of any commitment and
policy to be issued where we are dealing with water related titles involving lands
which have as a border; a body of water or contain a body of water within the
legal description. As a result of the United States Supreme Court decision
involving the State of Mississippi, Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Mississippi, 108 S.Ct.
791 (1988) we expand our consideration to that of non-navigable bodies of water
which are subject to the ebb and flow of the tide. Florida Statute 253.03 involving
the Trustees' ownership of lands in the State of Florida includes not only lands
owning by the State in trust by right of the sovereignty, or swamp and overflowed
lands not previously conveyed out but, also all tidal lands and lands covered by
shallow waters of the ocean or gulf or bays or lagoons thereof and all lands
owned by the State covered by fresh water.

Section (a) has been added to exclude coverage as to any access rights
burdening the lands being examined and including the easement by necessity
situation. Depending on the facts you have from the title examination, different
parts of the exception can and should be utilized.

"Any claim that title to any portion of the present or former bed of any body of
water, all or part of which is included within the lands described in this policy:

        (a) is, together with the lands described in this commitment and
        policy, subject to a right of way in favor of others; or

        (b) is vested in the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund
        of the State of Florida because any portion;

                (i) of said lands are sovereign lands of the State of
                Florida, including submerged, filled or artificially
                exposed lands and lands accreted to such lands.
                (General Exception No. 6)
               (ii) lies seaward of any established Erosion Control
               Line created pursuant to Florida Statute 161.

       (c) is subject to the rights of the United States of America under its
       control of navigation and commerce as to any portion of the lands
       described at (b) above; or

       (d) is, together with the lands described in this commitment and
       policy, subject to riparian rights or littoral rights."

Also, if it is decided that (b)(iii) can be deleted because it is determined that title
to the property was properly conveyed by the Trustees or that the property is
filled lands for which a disclaimer or quit claim deed from the Trustees has been
obtained, we must modify section (c) so that the section would read as follows:

       "(c) is subject to the inalienable rights of the State of Florida and of
       the United States of America under its control of navigation and
       commerce as to any portion of the lands described in the policy
       which were created by artificial means; or"

NOTE TO CONSIDER:

We should consider where there is a Trustee's deed that can be insured, but we
are uncertain as to where the original water boundary (mean or ordinary high
water) from the U.S. Government Survey or at time of Statehood is located, or
there is no certainty as to the existence of artificially filled or created lands, part
(b)(ii) of the exception set forth above could be limited to effect only those parts
near the present water boundary where you would have some concern. Consider
the idea of a "buffer area" wherein the exception would only apply. In a mangrove
area this may be substantial area. The extent of this "buffer area" where the
exception would apply would be based upon review of the particular title. Submit
the question to the underwriting office for your area of the State.

On July 1, 1993, the Florida Legislature adopted amendments to F.S. 253.12 by
adding subsections (9) and (10).

Generally, subsection (9) provides that title to any artificially filled in land in tidally
influenced waters which had been permanently extended, filled, added to existing
lands or created before July 1, 1975 is confirmed in the upland owner with certain
exceptions. The exceptions are:

       (1) If the party in title as of January 1, 1993 is the person who filled
       or caused to be filled in the State owned land, title will not vest by
       virtue of the operation of this statute; or
       (2) If previously there has been a judicial adjudication on title to the
       particular filled in lands, the judicial determination would control and
       title would not vest by virtue of the operation of this statute; or

       (3) If the subject land was subject to pending litigation on January
       1, 1993, title will not vest by virtue of the operation of this statute; or

       (4) If the land involves a "spoil island", title will not vest by virtue of
       the operation of this statute; or

       (5) If the lands are included on an official acquisition list, as of July
       1, 1993, of a state agency or water management district for
       conservation, preservation or recreation, title will not vest by virtue
       of the operation of this statute; or

       (6) If the lands are maintained as a state or local recreation area or
       shore preservation structure, title will not vest by virtue of the
       operation of this statute; or

                                       Comment

Residential Subdivisions Recorded before July 1, 1975

While the provisions of subsection (9) does not allow for the deletion of General
Exception 2(f) in all cases, we now have the benefit of the July 1, 1975 date. If
the land being examined was platted by subdivision plat dated before July 1,
1975, which meets the requirements in Chapter 177, was prepared by a licensed
Florida land surveyor, was signed by the record title holder and shows that the
land was not then submerged, you can delete General Exception 2(f) for policies
insuring title to 1-4 unit structures if you can verify; (i) by either a current survey
or surveyor's certificate, if one is submitted, or by review of current aerial
photography that no part of the land presently is submerged and; (ii) that none of
the exceptions set forth in the statute apply.

                                Un-subdivided Land

Where we do not have the benefit of a subdivision plat and we are examining title
in an area where we have concern regarding this issue, we must either; (i) review
aerial photography of the land , or other evidence such as old surveys, and
determine that all of the lands within the legal description were filled as of July 1,
1975 and currently remain in the same condition; or (ii) obtain a surveyor's
certificate to this effect. If such a determination is made and again none of the
exceptions to the statute apply, then for policies insuring title to 1 -4 unit
structures, we can delete Exception 2(f).

                                      In General
For policies that do not involve 1-4 unit structures, review your findings with your
underwriting office of the Company or ask for help in doing so.

Even if we can delete Exception 2(f), the navigational servitude in favor of the
United States should remain as an exception as to the filled in lands.

                   LACK OF A GOVERNMENT SURVEY

What if we have a patent or conveyance from the sovereign but we find that the
lands we are being asked to insure have not been officially surveyed in a
government survey. Title passes subject to the effect of a government survey. An
exception in the following form must be taken:

       This policy is subject to all consequences of an official government
       survey being hereafter performed locating amongst other things the
       boundary lines of the lands described in this policy which may be
       different from those as set forth in the description contained herein
       and which may cause the location of and dimensions of said lands
       to change.

The above exception is to be taken in addition to the Exception set forth above.
Do not delete General Exception Nos. 2 and 3.

                         OTHER TITLE EXCEPTIONS

This discussion cannot anticipate every situation you may encounter. It may be
necessary on occasion not to use the Exception set forth above in its entirety and
accordingly after discussions with the Company, we may delete, modify or
change any or all of the exception above. We also need to consider the following:

       (1) Beach Rights Exception: The Chicago Title Insurance Company
       General Underwriting Guide contains an exception to be used
       where we are insuring lands which in part would constitute a sandy
       beach. This exception is not repeated here but can be found in the
       Company's General Underwriting Guide under this topic.

       (2) There may be occasions where you after considering this
       discussion in its entirety you cannot make a determination as to
       whether sovereignty lands are located within the legal description.
       Take the following Exception in lieu of the sovereignty lands
       Exception:

              Title is not insured to the present or former beds of
              any body of water located within or adjacent to the
              lands described within this policy.
      (3) When dealing with what would now appear to be a lake, it may
      be difficult to determine whether the lake was natural or artificially
      created. Many "lakes" are being created as part of subdivision or
      other development activities where the lake bed is dredged out to
      build up the land base for development of the other lands in a
      particular area. Where these events occurred years ago, it would
      be difficult perhaps to ascertain these facts relating to the creation
      of the lake. If the government survey and plats or other recorded
      instruments do not disclose the existence of a meandered lake and
      the lake consists of less than 140 acres, we can consider insuring
      title to the bed of the lake. This decision is reserved to the
      Company.

      (4) The Company does not want to insure title below the mean high
      water line or mark or ordinary high water mark of any body of water,
      be it a river, lake, stream etc. You may want to set such an
      exception up in the following manner where we are convinced that
      there are not artificially filled-in or accreted lands and we have a
      proper conveyance from the State of Florida:

             Title is not insured to any lands lying below the
             natural ordinary or mean high water mark of .

      (5) The Company does not want to insure the nature of extent of
      riparian rights. The Exception could read as follows:

             The policy does not insure the nature of or extent of
             riparian or littoral rights.

      (6) The Sovereignty Lands Exception also disclaims any liability for
      accreted lands. Stated another way, the Exception could read as
      follows where you have a clear accretion problem which we are
      unable to ascertain would be natural as opposed to artificial:

             Title is not insured to any accretions which may fall
             within the lands described within this policy.

     ACCRETIONS AND RELICTIONS - THE WATER BOUNDARY

When the body of water is navigable, upland can be added to or taken away from
the land as the mean or ordinary high water line (the boundary of private
ownership) changes over periods of time. Several recent cases have outlined the
general rules that we must be aware of. In Kruse v. Grokap, Inc., Fla.App., 349
So.2d 788 (1977), we find the application of the doctrine of submergence of title
waters.
The parties were both record title holders of lots in Block 18 of Sarasota Beach
Subdivision located on Siesta Key. Appellant was the owner of Lot 23. Appellee
was the owner of Lot 10. The waters of the Gulf of Mexico originally laid along
the southwest side of Lot 23. Lot 10 was located to the northwest of Lot 23 and
separated therefrom by an alleyway.

The appellee brought a suit to quiet title to appellant's Lot 23 alleging that over a
period of years the waters of the Gulf of Mexico gradually encroached upon Lot
23 and the alleyway and then subsequently receded thus exposing what was
formerly Lot 23. It was appellee's contention that he was the riparian owner of
this land through accretion. The appellant filed an answer and a counterclaim
specifically denying the allegations of submergence and accretion. Following a
non-jury trial court entered judgment quieting the title to Lot 23 in appellee.

The appellee court stated "There are two lines of authority in this country
concerning the doctrine of submergence as related to gradual changes in the
shoreline. Same jurisdictions hold that land lost by erosion of submergence is
regained by the original owner when by reliction or accretion, the water
disappears and the land re-emerges. On the other hand, many courts hold that
once land is lost by erosion or submergence it is lost for good. If the water
encroaches upon the land of a more remote owner and then changes its
movement in the other direction gradually restoring the land which had been
submerged, the re-emerging land becomes the property of the remote owner
through the doctrine of accretion. Florida has adopted the latter view. But the
threshold question is when is the land "lost" to submergence.

Private ownership of land in Florida bordering on navigable waters extends to the
ordinary high water mark or in the case of tidal waters to ordinary high tide. The
ordinary high water mark has been deemed synonymous with mean high tide.
Therefore, the issue in this case is whether the ordinary or mean high tide of the
Gulf of Mexico had encroached upon appellee's Lot 10. If it did, appellant's title to
Lot 23 was lost by submergence, and when the land later re-emerged, appellee
became its owner by way of accretion. Thus, in ruling for appellee the trial court
necessarily concluded that the ordinary high tide of the Gulf had reached Lot 10.
The Court was compelled to reverse because as a matter of law there was
insufficient evidence upon which such a conclusion can be based.

The variations which occur in major tide producing forces will go through one
complete cycle in approximately 18.6 years. Apparently, this figure is often
rounded out to nineteen years. In Borax Consolidated Ltd. v. City of Los Angeles,
296 U.S. 10, the Court stated:

       "In view of the definition of the mean high tide, as given by the
       United States Coast and Geodetic Survey, that mean high water at
       any place is the average height of all the high waters at that place
       over a considerable period of time, and the further observation that
       from theoretical considerations of an astronomical character there
       should be a periodic variation in the rise of water above sea level
       having a period of 18.6 years, the Court of Appeals directed that in
       order to ascertain the mean high tide line with requisite certainty in
       fixing the boundary of valuable tidelands, such as those here in
       question appear to be, an average of 18.6 years should be
       determined as near as possible. We find no error in that
       instruction."

The significance of determining mean high water through observations covering
a long period of time is explained in Norwood Gay's article, The High Water
Mark: Boundary Between Public and Private Lands, at 18 U. Fla. L. 553, 556
(1965), where the author states:

       "The definition of mean high water is simple enough: it is the
       average height of the high waters at a given place over a period of
       nineteen years . . ."

                                   COMMENT

This well-reasoned opinion has been quoted extensively. See Ferm v. Saba, 444
So.2d 976 (Fla.App. 2 Dist. 1983). It illustrates another example of the fact that
with title to lands bordering upon navigable water, a search of the Public Records
is not always by itself sufficient. Inquiry must be made of the location of the mean
high tide line. Contact a local surveyor with knowledge of the area to verify the
extent of accretions or relictions. Through man made devices (i.e. piers, jetties)
many areas of "accretions" are not natural and do not become a part of the
upland owner's land. Also, sudden changes (i.e. hurricanes) in the shorelines do
not become part of the upland owner's land. Do not expand the legal description
to include accretions without written approval from Regional Counsel.

                                    EXAMPLE

The extreme difficulty of locating this boundary at different points of time was
discussed in the decision of Conner v. Barth, Fla.App., 410 So.2d 193 (1982).
Title to the following described lands was in dispute.

       That part of Government Lot 6 in Section 26, Township 19 South,
       Range 26 East, in Lake County, Florida, bounded and described as
       follows: Begin at the most Southerly corner of said Government Lot
       6, thence run in a Northerly direction along the Easterly line of said
       Government Lot 6, a distance of 65 feet, thence run in a Westerly
       direction and parallel with the Southwesterly line of Government Lot
       3 of the said Section 26, if extended Westerly, to the waters of Lake
       Saunders; begin again at the point of beginning, the nce run in a
       Northerly direction along the waters of Lake Saunders to intersect
       the line last described above.

                                   COMMENT

While the case sets forth rules of law to follow you can see the extreme difficulty
in locating that point of beginning where the boundary line could not be
accurately located at different points in time. Continuing to use the original
description of many years ago may result in a description that cannot be located
on the ground.

Certainly the position taken by the surveyor has logic although the Appellate
Court did not agree. To establish the meander line as a boundary makes sense
from the current examination standpoint even though it would be admitted that
the meander line may not be an accurate depiction of the location of the water at
any time.

Remember the rule of law that where it is impossible to locate the boundary line
of land abutting a body of water, the meander line would be presumed to be the
boundary line. This may or may not be the conclusion in the Conner case on
remand.

What we must take away from this case is the fact that the actual boundary of a
description used over many years in different conveyances may very well change
even though the legal description does not change in words. The surveyor's
certificate described earlier will give us facts to assist the examiner in analyzing
descriptions of this nature.

THE MEANDER LINE OR THE MEAN HIGH TIDE LINE - THE WATER
 BOUNDARY OF NAVIGABLE BODIES OF WATER - MANGROVES

Recent cases commencing with the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust
Fund v. Wetstone, Fla., 222 So.2d 10 (1969) have followed the rule established
by the Florida Supreme Court, wherein the true mean high tide line could not be
located (for the reason that the outer edges of which were heavily populated with
mangroves swamp areas) but the meander line as established by the original
government survey could be located through use of the original field notes and
acreage conveyed, the meander line was held to constitute the boundary line
between the swamp lands and the sovereignty lands.

Where we encounter present mangrove presence on the lands being insured,
take the sovereignty lands exception and do not give survey coverage.

  BEACH AND SHORE PRESERVATION ACT EROSION CONTROL
                        LINE
In 1970, the Florida Legislature declared the public policy of the State to be to
preserve and restore the beaches along the Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of
Mexico. The Legislature declared that it was the public policy of the State (Florida
Statute 161) to cause to be fixed and determined pursuant to Beach Nourishment
and Restoration and Erosion Control Projects, the boundary lines between the
lands of the State bordering on the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico and the
Bays, Lagoons and other tidal reaches thereof, and the upland properties
adjacent thereto. The Statute provides a procedure whereby in implementing this
public policy, the Board of Trustees of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund are
authorized to hold administrative hearings to approve or disapprove Beach
Erosion Control Projects for the purpose of restoring or preserving the beaches in
any part of the State. As a result of any hearing or hearings, the Board, if it
approves, has the burden of establishing the location of the "Erosion Control
Line". The Erosion Control Line means the line determined in accordance with
the provisions of the Statute which represents the landward extent of claims of
the State in its capacity as the Sovereign title holder on the date of the recording
of the survey which will be discussed below.

The purpose of the Erosion Control Line is to establish a new line of demarkation
of private ownership and sovereignty lands. In locating the Erosion Control Line,
the Board of Trustees are to follow the existing line of mean high water but are
not required to establish the Erosion Control Line exactly where the mean high
water line is located (Florida Statute 161.161(3)). Once the restoration project
would be completed, the water line will be some distance seaward of the Erosion
Control Line.

Once the project has been approved, the Trustees were required to file in the
public records of the county or counties where the land is located a plat showing
where the Erosion Control Line lies, and a copy of the resolution approving the
Beach Erosion Control Project.

Florida Statute 161.191(1) provides that when the plat is recorded, "title to all
lands seaward to the Erosion Control Line shall be deemed to be vested in the
State by right of its sovereignty, and title to all lands landward of such line shall
be vested in the riparian upland owners. . ." Paragraph (2) provides that once the
line has been established, "the common law shall no longer operate to increase
or decrease the proportions of any upland property lying landward of such line
either by accretion or erosion or by any other natural or artificial process..."

The Statute goes on to provide that while the upland owner would now no longer
have the water as the natural boundary line of his or her ownership, the upland
owner shall be entitled to all common law riparian rights including but not limited
to rights of ingress, egress, view, boating, bathing and fishing.
A procedure is described in the Statute by which the Erosion Control Line can be
voided in the event in the future there would be further erosion beyo nd or upland
of the Erosion Control Line.

Where the title line of the parcel of land was the water line of the Atlantic Ocean
or the Gulf of Mexico, we require that the title insurance policy contain an
exception in form similar to the one listed on pages 399 and 400.

Remember that the title line would be moved by the recording of the resolution
and plat from the line of mean high water to the Erosion Control Line. After
completion of the project the apparent water line would be a good distance east
or west of the erosion control line.

WE CAUTION YOU THAT YOUR NORMAL TITLE EXAMINATION MAY NOT
DISCLOSE THE RECORDATION OF AN EROSION CONTROL LINE PLAT
FOR THE REASON THAT THIS PLAT WOULD POSSIBLY AFFECT LANDS
OUTSIDE YOUR EXAMINATION.

When you have knowledge of an erosion control line plat in your title
examination, place the following exceptions in Schedule B:

       (a) This commitment/policy does not insure any lands lying
       (easterly) (or westerly) of the Erosion Control Line as same is
       shown on the Erosion Control Li ne Plat recorded at of the Public
       Records of County, Florida.

       (b) This commitment/policy when issued should not be construed
       as insuring the title to any land lying between the mean high water
       line on date of the recordation of the Erosion Control Line Pla t and
       the Erosion Control Line as shown therein, which may have vested
       in the insured or its predecessors in title as a result of the
       implementation of Chapter 161 of the Florida Statutes.

Below are set forth references to Erosion Control Line Plats that the Company
has been made aware of as of July 1992.

                      BREVARD (CAPE CANAVERAL)

Established: January 28, 1974

Location: Sections 12, 13, 14, 23 & 26, Township 26 South, Range 37 East

Length: 14,308.82 feet or 2.70 miles

                 BREVARD (INDIALANTIC-MELBOURNE)
Established: June 26, 1979

Location: Section 31, Township 27 South, Range 38 East; and

Sections 5, 6 and 8, Township 28 South, Range 38 East

Length: 11,508 feet or 2.179 miles

                                  BROWARD

Established: February 9, 1976

Location: Sections 24, 25 and 36, Township 50 South, Range 42 East

Length: 2.8 miles

               BROWARD (HOLLYWOOD-HALLANDALE)

Established: March 20, 1979

Location: Section 36, Township 50 South, Range 42 East; and

Sections 1, 12, 13, 24, 25 and 26, Township 51 South, Range 42 East

Length: 5.2 miles

    BROWARD (POMPANO BEACH/LAUDERDALE-BY-THE-SEA)

Established: May 4, 1982

Location: Sections 29 and 31, Township 48 South, Range 43 East; and

Sections 5, 6, 7 and 18, Township 49 South, Range 43 East

Length: 27,867 feet or 5.278 miles

                        COLLIER (MARCO ISLAND)

Established: January 23, 1990

Location: Sections 6, 7, 18 and 19, Township 52 South, Range 26 East

Length: 17,056.0 feet or 3.230 miles

                           DADE (BAL HARBOUR)
Established: January 16, 1973

Location: Sections 14, 23 and 26, Township 52 South, Range 42 East

Length: 4,483.49 feet or .849 miles

                                      DADE

Established: June 15, 1976 Recorded in O.R. Book 105 at Page 62

Location: North from Government Cut to North limits of Haulover Beach Park

Length: 10 miles

                          DADE (KEY BISCAYNE)

Established: March 6, 1984

Location: Section 33, Township 54 South, Range 42 East; and

Section 4, Township 55 South, Range 42 East

Length: 6,404 feet or 1.21 miles

                             DADE (SUNNY ISLES)

Established: November 17, 1987

Location: Sections 2, 11 and 14, Township 52 South, Range 42 East

Length: 2.5 miles

DADE (SUNNY ISLES BEACH) Recorded in Plat Book 134 at Page 47

                                      DUVAL

Established: March 15, 1976

Location: Sections 3 and 10, Township 3 North, Range 29 East;

Sections 9, 16, 21, 28, 33 and 42, Township 2 North, Range 29 East;

and Section 38, Township 1 North, Range 29 East

Length: 10.5 miles
                           LEE (BONITA BEACH)

Established: Pending

Location: Section 24 and 25, Township 47 South, Range 24 East

Length: 4,990.32 feet or 0.945 mile

                          LEE (CAPTIVA ISLAND)

Established: December 7, 1982

Location: Sections 26 and 35, Township 45 South, Range 21 East; and Sections
2, 3 and 11, Township 46 South, Range 21 East

Length: 15,730.61 feet or 2.97 miles

                    LEE (SOUTH SEAS PLANTATION)

Established: August 26, 1980

Location: Sections 15, 22, 26 and 27, Township 45 South, Range 21 East

Length: 10,093 feet or 1.911 miles

                        LONGBOAT KEY, TOWN OF

Established: Pending

Location: Sections 22, 23, 25, 26 and 36, Township 35 South, Range 16, East;
Section 31, Township

35 South, Range 17 East; and Sections 6, 7, 8, 16, 17, 21, 27 and 28, Township
36 South,

Range 17 East

Length: 47,103.60 feet or 8.921 miles

                    MANATEE (ANNA MARIA ISLAND)

Established: January 22, 1992

Location: Sections 20, 28, 29 and 33, Township 34 South, Range 16 East; and
Section 4, Township 35 South, Range 16 East
Length: 22,799.29 feet or 4.318 miles

                       MANATEE (LONGBOAT KEY)

Established: April 7, 1977

Location: Sections 15 and 22, Township 55 South, Range 16 East

Length: 5,876.69 feet or 1.11 miles

                        MARTIN (JUPITER ISLAND)

Established: June 4, 1973

Location: Sections 10, 14, 23, 25 and 26, Township 39 South, Range 42 East

Length: 26,400 feet or 5 miles

                                      NASSAU

Established: March 7, 1978

Location: Sections 8, 9, 12, 13 and 20, Township 3 North, Range 29 East

Length: 20,384.94 feet or 3.86 miles

                    NASSAU (SOUTH AMELIA ISLAND)

Established: March 9, 1989

Location: Section 1, Township 1 North, Range 28 East;

Sections 10, 11, 13, 14, 18 and 22, Township 2 North, Range 28 East;

Sections 6, 38 and 39, Township 1 North, Range 29 East

Length: 33,000 feet or 6.25 miles

                     PALM BEACH (DELRAY BEACH)

Established: February 20, 1973

Location: Sections 9, 10, 15, 16, 21 and 28, Township 46 South, Range 43 East

Length: 15,096 feet or 2.85 miles
                    PALM BEACH (NORTH BOCA RATON)

Established: April 7, 1987

Location: Sections 9, 16, 21, 28 and 29, Township 47 South, Range 43 East

Length: 8,782 feet or 1.66 miles

            PALM BEACH (OCEAN RIDGE/BRINY BREEZES)

Established: April 6, 1982

Location: Sections 15, 22, 27 and 34, Township 45 South, Range 43 East

Length: 2.5 miles

                PALM BEACH (JUPITER/CARLIN SHORE)

Established: Pending

Location: Section 32, Township 40 South, Range 43 East; and Section 5,
Township 41 South, Range 43 East

Length: 5,607.90 feet or 1.062 miles

                PALM BEACH (TOWN OF PALM BEACH)

Established: Project deactivated in July 1992

Location: Sections 14, 23, 26 and 35, Township 43 South, Range 43 East

Length: 13,458.83 feet or 2.549 miles

                    PINELLAS (INDIAN ROCKS BEACH)

Established: September 26, 1989

Location: Sections 1, 12 and 13, Township 30 South, Range 14 East

Length: 13,834.32 feet or 2.62 miles

                PINELLAS (INDIAN SHORES, PHASE 1A)

Established: May 28, 1991
Location: Section 24 and 25, Township 30 South, Range 14 East; and Section
30, Township 30 South, Range 15 East

Length: 3,235.35 feet or 0.612 mile

                PINELLAS (INDIAN SHORES, PHASE 1B)

Established: May 28, 1991

Location: Sections 30 and 31, Township 30 South, Range 15 East

Length: 3,276.22 feet or 0.620 mile

                 PINELLAS (INDIAN SHORES, PHASE II)

Established: May 28, 1991

Location: Sections 13 and 14, Township 30 South, Range 14 East

Length: 7,801.38 feet or 1.48 miles

                   PINELLAS (PASS-A-GRILLE BEACH)

Established: August 25, 1987

Location: Sections 18 and 19, Township 32 South, Range 16 East

Length: 5,417 feet or 1.025 miles

                PINELLAS (NORTH REDINGTON BEACH)

Established: August 26, 1980

Location: Section 5, Township 31 South, Range 15 East

Length: 1,600.58 feet or .30 mile

                    PINELLAS (REDINGTON SHORES)

Established: March 19, 1985

Location: Section 31, Township 30 South, Range 15 East

Length: 2,734 feet or .517 mile
              PINELLAS (REDINGTON SHORES, PHASE II)

Established: October 7, 1986

Location: Section 31, Township 30 South, Range 15 East; and

Sections 5 and 6, Township 31 South, Range 15 East

Length: 3,530 feet or .66 mile

                           PINELLAS (SAND KEY)

Established: December 16, 1980

Location: Sections 17, 19, 20 and 30, Township 29 South, Range 15 East

Length: 7,000 feet or 1.32 miles

                  PINELLAS (ST. PETERSBURG BEACH)

Established: November 6, 1973

Location: Section 36, Township 31 South, Range 15 East; and

Section 1, Township 32 South, Range 15 East

Length: 2,456 feet or .465 mile

                            SARASOTA (VENICE)

Established: Book

Location: Sections 1, 12, 13 and 24, Township 39 South, Range 18 East; and
Sections 19 and 30,

Township 39 South, Range 19 East

Length: 20,089 feet or 3.804 miles

The Company has maps which depict the approximate location of the Erosion
Control Lines described in this section.

If you wish to view a map either look in the Florida Supplement notebook that you
may have in your office or call Floyd Krause or Leslie Chassman at 1-800-626-
7616, extension 3017 or extension 3020.
                          FLORIDA STATUTE 161.57

         COASTAL PROPERTIES DISCLOSURE STATEMENT

The 1985 session of the Legislature adopted the above referenced statute which
provides as follows:

       (1) The Legislature finds that it is necessary to ensure that the
       purchasers of interest in real property located on coastal areas
       partially or totally seaward of the coastal construction control line as
       defined in Florida Statute 161.053 are fully apprised of the
       character of the regulation of the real property in such coastal
       areas, and in particular as such lands are subject to frequent and
       severe fluctuations.

       (2) Unless otherwise waived in writing by the purchaser at or prior
       to the closing of any transaction where an interest in real property
       located either partially or totally seaward of the coastal construction
       control line as defined in Florida Statute 161.053 is being
       transferred, the sellers shall provide to the purchaser an affidavit, or
       a survey meeting the requirements of Chapter 472, delineating the
       location of the coastal construction control line on the property
       being transferred.

Florida Statute 161.053 provides a procedure where a coastal construction
control line can be established by appropriate procedures being followed. This is
similar to a building set back line and basically prohibits new structures from
being erected seaward of the line. This line would be established and referenced
on a coastal construction control line plat. These plats would be or record in your
County, if they have been established. You should become familiar with these
plats.

In absence of a coastal construction control line being established in your
County, the Statute states that Florida Statute 161.052 shall be in force. This
Statute provides a general 50 foot set back from the line of mean high water at
any riparian coastal location fronting the Gulf of Mexico or Atlantic Coast
Shoreline of the State, exclusive of bays, inlets, rivers, bayous, creeks, passes
and the like. The Statute may also recognize the erosion control line as being the
demarkation line or setback line.

You should research the counties where you examine title to determine those
Coastal Construction Control Line Plats and/or Erosion Control Line Plats that
are of record and reflect same as discussed herein.

               COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE
We have information from the Department of Natural Resources dated as of July
9, 1992 regarding Coastal Construction Control Line plats that have been
recorded in the various Counties in the State of Florida. This information is
reproduced for your use. It is IMPORTANT that yo u familiarize yourself with
those plats in the Counties where you do business. Review them. More often
than not when you are examining title to property along the Atlantic Ocean or the
Gulf of Mexico, the plat will affect your property even though you may not find
same in an abstract because of the legal description in the plat.

This Company takes the position that the Coastal Construction line established
by Chapter 161 of Florida Statutes is a line established by governmental action
and would be excluded from coverage in the title insurance policy. Where it is
specifically fixed by a recorded plat in the County where the land is located, it
must be shown in the title insurance policy. It should be reflected in the policy
somewhat as follows:

      Note for information: There appears of record in County, Florida, a
      Coastal Construction Control Line Plat recorded at Plat Book , at
      Page which plat depicts the Coastal Construction Control Line set
      for County as affecting the lands described in this
      commitment/policy.

If you are furnished a survey which may show possible encroachments over this
line, your policy should contain the following statement as part of the above
referenced information note immediately after the above statement:

      It is noted that the improvements shown on the survey encroach
      over the coastal construction setback line disclosed on the survey
      prepared by as set forth herein, for which no coverage is provided
      as to said encroachment by this policy.

As an alternative manner of setting forth the statement immediately after the
statement regarding the recorded plat, the following language may be used:

      The deletion of General Exceptions 2 and 3 should not be
      construed as providing any insurance regarding the encroachments
      of the improvements over the coastal construction setback line as
      disclosed by survey prepared by as matters relating to
      governmental laws or ordinances affecting the location of
      improvements on the property are excluded from coverage in this
      policy. Accordingly, no assurance is provided herein as to the right
      of the insured to maintain the improvement in the location disclosed
      by the survey because of the encroachment as shown on the
      survey over the Coastal Construction Control Line.
Set forth herein are those plats referenced that we ha ve been furnished
information that have been recorded as of July 27, 1992. We will endeavor to
update this information on a regular basis, but remind you that you must make
every effort to use this information and that on the erosion control lines set forth
in other places in this Underwriting Guide; AND to keep yourself updated on any
new or revised plats that may be recorded in the Counties where you do
business. If you discover any new plats we would appreciate your sharing this
information with the Company by mailing a copy of same to Floyd Krause in the
Miami Office. The address is 6303 Blue Lagoon Drive, Suite 100, Miami, Florida
33126.

                              MAN-MADE LAKES

In the case of Anderson v. Bell, 433 So.2d 1202 (Fla. 1983), the plaintiff had
excavated certain low lands on his property resulting in the partial flooding of the
Plaintiff's property and the defendant's property creating an artificial lake. The
Florida Supreme Court was asked whether the defendants had a right to use the
water above the plaintiff's property for fishing and boating.

The Supreme Court discussed several important decisions it had rendered in the
past and the applicability of same to this case.

                            RIGHT OF ACCESS TO

In Osceola County v. Triple E Development Company, Fla., 90 So.2d 600 (1956),
the plaintiff (Osceola County) attempted to condemn a right-of-way to two lakes
located entirely within the defendant's property. The Supreme Court held that a
lake or pond entirely within the boundaries of a single tract of land belongs to the
owner of the land as an appurtenance thereto and the public had no right for
access thereto.

The court also discussed briefly the holding of the United States Supreme Court
in Kaiser Aetna v. The United States Government, 444 U.S. 164 (1970). The
United States asserted that under the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution,
the public had rights of access to a marina that was dredged by the plaintiff and
connected to the navigable bay by an either foot channel. As a result of work
done by the plaintiff, the area had become accessible to boats traveling interstate
commerce. The government contended that the public could not deny access to
the marina by virtue of the navigable character of the transformed waterway. The
Court however, held that before the Government could take over management of
the property or even "physically invade an easement in the property", it must
condemn the property and pay just compensation.

The Florida Supreme Court discussed many cases in addition to the ones
referenced above in the Anderson decision. It noted that in other jurisdictions
some courts have found that the body of water had become defacto natural after
it had been in existence for a long time, and, therefore, riparian rights obtained.
The court held as follows:

       We hold today that an owner of lands that lie contiguous to or
       beneath a portion of a man made lake has no right to the beneficial
       use of the entire lake merely by virtue of the fact of ownership of
       the land.

A similar result involving man made lake is discussed in Silver Blue Lake
Apartments, Inc. v. Silver Blue Lake Home Owners Association, 245 So.2d 609
(1971), involving adjoining owners.

            NON-NAVIGABLE NATURAL LAKE - OWNERSHIP

In Duval v. Thomas, 114 So.2d 791 (Fla. 1959), the rights of two or more persons
who owned portions of the bottom land of a non-navigable natural lake was at
issue. The Supreme Court adopted the civil doctrine that when ownership of the
bottom lands is vested in more than one person, each land owner who owns
portions of the bottom land would be entitled to the reasonable use of the lake
which includes fishing, swimming and boating.

Navigable Lakes: The Florida Supreme Court's decision in Odom v. Deltona
Corp., 341 So.2d 977 (Fla. 1977), involved certain navigable non-meandered
lakes or ponds of less than 140 acres within tracts of land that Deltona
Corporation had obtained the title to. The Trustees of the Internal Improvement
Trust Fund had conveyed the various lands into private ownership without
excepting from the conveyance sovereignty lands which constituted the beds of
navigable bodies of water. The Supreme Court held that the State of Florida's
claim to the underlying navigable waters which had been previously conveyed
were extinguished by the Marketable Record Title Act. The Court further found
that the conveyance of these sovereignty lands which had occurred more than
thirty years prior vested marketable record title in the grantee, his successors
and assigns so long as that during that time the State had made no effort of
record to reclaim the said lands.

In 1978, the Florida Legislature amended the Marketable Record Title Act
(Florida Statute 712) to provide as a new Exception to marketability, the
following:

       (7) State title to lands beneath navigable waters acquired by virtue
       of sovereignty.

The Odom decision really sets forth the exception to the general rule relating to
title to lands below navigable bodies of water of less than 140 acres. If it can be
determined that the body of water is navigable in fact, then the rule is that the title
to said lands was vested in the State of Florida at the time of admission of the
State of Florida to the United States and has remained in that body ever since
unless divested under the doctrine of the Odom case and prior to the amendment
referred to above in 1978. The Company does not want to insure title to present
or former bodies of water of this nature.

Reference is made to discussion in this section to the 1986 Florida Supreme
Court decision of Coastal Petroleum v. American Cyanamid. This case stands for
the proposition that the Marketable Record Title Act does not and did not divest
the Trustees of title to lands under navigable bodies of water subject to its
holding in the Odom case which it did not overrule.

Remember that when we insure large parcels of land it may be impossible for the
title examiner to ascertain whether there are present or former bodies of water
located within the perimeters, especially when the legal descriptions do not refer
to the bodies of water. The examiner should review any indexes, maps or aerial
photographs in the county to ascertain whether there are any bodies of water
presently located within the description of the property being examined. A review
of the government survey would show former bodies of water. The general
exception that should be taken where we are insuring is as follows:

       Title is not insured to the present or former beds of (lake, river or
       stream) located within the legal description of the lands described
       in this policy.

                                RIPARIAN RIGHTS

An exception in the following form is to be taken where we are insuring lands
abutting a navigable or any large body of water:

The nature or extent of riparian or littoral rights are not insured.

Florida Statute 197.228 defines riparian rights, in part, as follows:

                      (1) Riparian rights are those incident to
                      land bordering upon navigable waters.
                      They are rights of ingress, egress,
                      boating, bathing and fishing and such
                      other rights as may have been defined
                      by law . . . The land to which the owner
                      holds title must extend to the ordinary
                      high water mark of the navigable water
                      in order that riparian rights may attach.
                      Conveyance of title to or lease of the
                      riparian land entitles the grantee to the
                      riparian rights running therewith whether
                     or not mentioned in the deed or lease of
                     the upland.

You can see that some of these rights are personal in nature and therefore are
not insurable under the title insurance policy. The recently decided case of
Bonifay v. Garner, 445 So.2d 597 (Fla.App. 1 Dist. 1984), involved the decision
where the property was determined not to be "riparian" because of an intervening
strip of land between the border of the property in question and the shoreline of
the body of water. Accordingly, no riparian rights were deemed to be involved in
the decision.

Make sure that the legal description in the policy does not mention that riparian
rights are included therein.

                                     RIVERS

              THE 1986 COASTAL PETROLEUM DECISION

The materials that are written on earlier pages take into account the 1986 Florida
Supreme Court decision in Coastal Petroleum v. American Cyanamid, 492 So.2d
339, (Fla. 1986). In this case the Florida Supreme Court held that the Marketable
Record Title Act did not divest the Trustees of their title to sovereignty lands.

Additionally, the court found that swamp and overflow land deeds from the
Trustees did not and could not convey sovereignty lands below the ordinary high
water mark of navigable rivers. The doctrine of legal estoppel or estoppel by
deeds did not bar the State's later assertion to title to sovereignty lands under the
majority of the Supreme Court's opinion.

Other rules were given in this decision that relate to water boundaries. They are:

       1) No patent or survey is required to delineate the boundaries to
       sovereignty lands and title to same as vested in the State to be held
       as a public trust.

       2) The Federal Government did not hold title to sovereignty lands
       after Florida became a State and therefore had no power to convey
       them either to the State or other parties. Remember we have
       learned that the title to sovereignty lands became vested in the
       State of Florida upon its admission to the United States.

       3) Federal government surveys establishing meander lines were
       not conclusive against the State as to the boundary lines between
       the State sovereignty lands and the Federal Uplands.
      4) The meander line creates a rebuttable presumption of
      navigability but it is not necessarily a boundary line unless it is
      expressly one of the calls of the boundaries.

      5) The high and low water marks of navigable waters change over
      time, but these natural changes do not divest the public of
      ownership of navigable waters.

      6) The Supreme Court here limited its earlier decision in the Odom
      case to non-navigable lakes of less than 140 acres.

  COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE PLATS AS OF JULY,
                        1992

County: Bay

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 28

Date Recorded: 08-15-75 Refiled

Record Location:



County: Bay

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 28

Date Recorded: 09-17-74

Record Location: Revised-Refiled Plat Bk. #1



County: Brevard

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 40

Date Recorded: 10-06-81 Refiled M.M.
Record Location: Survey Bk. #2A, Pp. 15-29



County: Brevard

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 40

Date Recorded: 03-21-75

Record Location: Survey Bk. #2A, Pp. 1-14



County: Brevard (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 40

Date Recorded: 12-04-86 M.M.

Record Location: Survey Bk. #2A, Pp. 29-42



County: Broward

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 24

Date Recorded: 11-17-81

Record Location: 81-315377 Misc. Map Bk. #6, Pg. 10



County: Charlotte

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14
Date Recorded: 02-10-77

Record Location: Bk. 547, Pp. 019-966



County: Charlotte

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14

Date Recorded: 04-28-78

Record Location: Bk. 574, Pp. 790-816



County: Charlotte (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14

Date Recorded: 01-29-85 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: Setback Bk. #1, Pp. 1A-1G



County: Collier

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 28

Date Recorded: 07-29-80 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: Doc. 365665, Bk. #1, Pp. 13-25



County: Collier

County Location: Lower West Coast
Miles: 28

Date Recorded: 10-31-74

Record Location: CCSBL Bk. #1, Pp. 1-12



County: Collier

County Location: ?

Miles: ?

Date Recorded: 06-29-89

Record Location: Bk. 1, Pp. 26-36



County: Dade

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 21

Date Recorded: 02-10-82

Record Location: Bulkhead Plat Bk. #82R, 31600 Bk. #74, Pg. 25



County: Dade

County Location: Northern Coast Sunny Isles Beach

Date Recorded: August 1988

Record Location: Plat Bk. 134, Page 47



County: Duval

County Location: Upper East Coast
Miles: 16

Date Recorded: 03-12-76

Record Location: Map Bk. "B", Pp. 24 A, B, C, D & E



County: Escambia

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 41

Date Recorded: 09-12-75

Record Location: Plat Bk. #9, Pg. 72



County: Escambia (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 41

Date Recorded: 06-19-86 M.M.

Record Location: Plat Bk. 13, Pg. 23, Sheets A-O



County: Flagler

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 18

Date Recorded: 08-16-73

Record Location: Bk. #26, Pp. 27-33



County: Flagler
County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 18

Date Recorded: 10-25-78 Refiled M.M.

Record Location:



County: Flagler (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 18

Date Recorded: 04-14-88 M.M.

Record Location: CCCL Bk. #28, Pp. 5-12



County: Franklin

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 47

Date Recorded: 09-17-74

Record Location: Coord. & Aerials Filed in Aught by date



County: Franklin (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 47

Date Recorded: 04-30-84 M.M.

Record Location: CCCL Bk. , Pp. 1-19
County: Gulf

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 30

Date Recorded: 02-26-76 Refiled

Record Location:



County: Gulf

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 30

Date Recorded: 03-21-75

Record Location: Misc. Plat Book #1, Pp. 11 -25



County: Gulf (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 30

Date Recorded: 02-05-86 M.M.

Record Location: Misc. Plat Book #1, Pp. 12, 1-13



County: Indian River

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 01-02-75

Record Location: O.R. Book 082, Pp. 340-387
County: Indian River

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 06-09-81 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: Plat Book #10, Pp. 93-93H



County: Indian River (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 03-05-87 M.M.

Record Location: Plat Book #12, Pp. 32-32H



County: Lee

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 44

Date Recorded: 04-17-78

Record Location: CCSBL R. Bk., Pp. 1-16



County: Manatee

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14

Date Recorded: 02-24-78 Refiled
Record Location: Pp. 75-80



County: Manatee

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14

Date Recorded: 10-28-77

Record Location: Rd. Plat Book #7, Pg. 2



County: Manatee (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 14

Date Recorded: 08-06-87 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: Rd. Plat Book #10, Pp. 1-7



County: Martin

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 05-23-72

Record Location: Plat Book #5, Pg. 17



County: Martin (2nd Re-Estab.)

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 22
Date Recorded: 09/88

Record Location:



County: Martin (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 07-09-85

Record Location: Plat Book #9, Pg. 99



County: Nassau

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 13

Date Recorded: 04-15-76

Record Location: Setback Line Pp. 1-6



County: Nassau (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 13

Date Recorded: 04-06-83 M.M.

Record Location: Setback Line Pp. 1-6



County: Okaloosa

County Location: Panhandle
Miles: 10

Date Recorded: 03-05-79

Record Location:



County: Okaloosa

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 10

Date Recorded: 04-02-76

Record Location: Row Bk. #2, Pp. 110-112



County: Palm Beach

County Location: Lower East Coast

Miles: 45

Date Recorded: 01-17-79

Record Location: Plat Book #36, Pp. 91-107



County: Pinellas

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 35

Date Recorded: 01-16-79

Record Location: Inst. #79007802, CCCL Bk. #1



County: Sarasota
County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 35

Date Recorded: 09-05-78

Record Location: CCCL Bk. #1, Pp. 1-15, O.R. Book 1258, Pg. 2048



County: Sarasota (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Lower West Coast

Miles: 35

Date Recorded: 03-02-89

Record Location: O.R. Book 2102, Pg. 2632



County: St. Johns

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 41

Date Recorded: 04-11-74

Record Location: Bk. #13A, Pp. 1-17



County: St. Johns

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 41

Date Recorded: 04-13-78 Refiled

Record Location:
County: St. Johns (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 41

Date Recorded: 01-28-88 M.M.

Record Location: CCCL Bk. #138, Pp. 1-15



County: St. Lucie

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 11-28-72

Record Location: Plat Book. #16, Pp. 32, 32A-32G



County: St. Lucie

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 12-12-78 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: Bk. #19, Pp. 8, 8A-8G



County: St. Lucie (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 22

Date Recorded: 09-15-88 Refiled M.M.

Record Location: CCCL Bk. #26, 26A-26I
County: Volusia

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 46

Date Recorded: 08-21-73

Record Location: N/Pen. Revised Map Book #30, Pg. 22



County: Volusia

County Location: Upper East Coast

Miles: 46

Date Recorded: 09-16-74 Refiled

Record Location: Bk. #26, Pp. 27-33



County: Walton

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 25

Date Recorded: 06-04-75

Record Location: CSBL Bk. #1, Pp. 1 -10, 11-19



County: Walton

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 25

Date Recorded: 08-02-79 Refiled
Record Location:



County: Walton

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 25

Date Recorded: 12-29-82 M.M.

Record Location: Book #1, Pp. 1-9



County: Walton (Re-Estab.)

County Location: Panhandle

Miles: 25

Date Recorded: 08-02-79 Refiled

Record Location:

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Lingjuan Ma Lingjuan Ma
About