"Novelty" Land Deeds (One sq. in. typical)

The other day while going through some VERY old stuff that had not seen the light-of-day for many years, I came across a very official sounding “novelty” Deed of Land for one square inch of a parcel in Franklin County Tennessee, being tract # 1,512,693 of 6,272,640 in a one acre tract purchased by Davy Crockett Frontier Lands, Inc., and apparently given away from their (then) Popcorn Village headquarters as premiums in association with the Pops-Rite Popcorn company. I think my sainted Mother invested a (then) 3 cent First Class postage stamp in obtaining this treasure for this (then) dyed-in-the-fur Davy Crockett fan. The deed is dated June 15, 1955, and as I said, SOUNDS as if it truly conveys the land. Since I never put my name on the “Grantee” line I suppose it could be transferred to anyone, but it got me to thinking: Although highly unlikely, suppose this one acre tract wound up being sold to someone who who developed and improved the land. Could I possably make a claim and make the developer pay me some outlandish fee for not having received my permission to develop the property? I’m sure if this same square inch tract were in certain places in the middle of Manhattan I could probably retire on on the proceeds of a properly prosecuted claim.

A cursory Google search turned up several similar enterprises (one square inch of a Yukon gold field, one square inch of the Australian out-back, your own one inch square ranch in Texas, etc.) eBay lists a Buy-It-Now deal for one square inch of Ireland for $19.95 (+ 2.95 S&H). Could/would this qualify as an off-shore tax haven? What I could NOT find is any kind of “clearing house” that might deal in such Lilliputian parcels. Is there a market for my piece of Davy Crockett’s “bar’ mountain”? What could it possably be worth some 47 years hence? Should I hold out for 50? (SERIOUS inquiries only!):wink:

Offhand, I would say the deed itself is worthless unless you can prove it was recorded with the appropriate registrar in Franklin County, TN.

However, as a Davy Crockett collectible , it might be worth something on eBay.

I don’t know about your tax questions, but do a google search on “adverse possession” to learn why you can not claim title 47 years later. I also wouldn’t be surprised if the “deed” has language that says that it reverts back to the popcorn company after 5 years, i.e. 1960. But it was a nice thought! :slight_smile:

DEED OF LAND

This indenture made this 15th day of June in the year of our Lord, One Thousand Nine Hundred and Fifty-five, between DAVY CROCKETT FRONTIER LANDS, Inc., a body corporate under the laws of the State of Tennessee, with its principal office at Popcorn Village, near the Tennessee Capital, Nashville, Tennessee, hereinafter called the GRANTOR, and (Fill in your name) , hereinafter called the GRANTEE,
WITNESSETH:
That the GRANTOR, for good and valuable consideration to it in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, doth grant, bargain, sell, enfeoff, release, demise, convey, and confirm unto the GRANTEE, his or her heirs and assigns, forever, an estate in fee simple in and to a certain tract or parcel of land in the 5th Civil District of Franklin County, State of Tennessee, being located on DAVY CROCKETT MOUNTAIN, overlooking the Polly Crockett grave, near Bear Creek in Grizzly Bear Branch in the general area of Opossum Hollow and Ransom Hollow, and in the area of homeland and hunting grounds of DAVY CROCKETT, same being approximately 93 miles from POPCORN VILLAGE, the home of POPS-RITE POPCORN, and 91 miles from the Capitol Building of the State of Tennessee, and described as follows:

	Being a tract of land one square inch in area which tract is a part of the following described acre of land to-wit:

	One acre of land in Franklin County, Tennessee, being a part of that certain 3.1-acre tract described in deed dated the 4th day of June, 1955, and recorded in Book 90, page 571, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, to which reference is here made. The one-acre tract herein conveyed is located in the northwest corner of the said 3.1-acre tract and is further particularly described as follows:                      

	Beginning at an 18-inch walnut tree, the same being located 555 feet in a westerly direction from the southwest corner of a plow shed on the Reynolds lands as described by deed of record in Book 81, page 112, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, running thence south 30 (deg.) west 208.8 feet to a stake; thence south 80 (deg.) east 208.8 feet to a stake; thence north 30 (deg.) east 208.8 feet to a stake; thence north 80 (deg.) west 208.8 feet to the point of beginning, containing one acre.

The tract herein conveyed is that certain one square inch in area referred to as Tract No. 1512693 in that certain deed from Forrest W. Larkin, et ux, to DAVY CROCKETT FRONTIER LANDS, INC., dated June 8, 1955, as of record in Book 90, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County Tennessee.

TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the above described lands and premises, together with all and singular rights and appurtenances thereto and in any wise belonging unto the said GRANTEE, his or her heirs and assigns, forever, and to his or her sole use, benefit and behoof, forever, subject, nevertheless, to the reservations, limitations, provisos and conditions herein expressed and expressed in the deed of conveyance from the said Forrest W. Larkin, et ux, to DAVY CROCKETT FRONTIER LANDS, Inc., as of record in Book 90, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, and the GRANTOR, for itself, its successors and assigns, doth hereby covenant, promise and agree to and with the GRANTEE, his or her heirs and assigns, in manner following, that is to say, that it shall be lawful for the GRANTEE, his or her heirs and assigns, from time to time, and at all times hereafter, peaceably and quietly, to enter the said lands and premises and to hold, occupy, possess and enjoy same without the lawful suit, hindrance, eviction, denial, or disturbance from or by the GRANTOR and also that the GRANTOR has a good, sure and perfect estate in fee simple in said lands and premises and good right, full power and lawful authority to sell and convey the same in manner and form as they are hereby sold and conveyed and mentioned, or intended so to do, and the same are free from encumbrances, **subject, however to the provisions** herein contained **and those conditions in said deed of record in Book 90, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee.**

And this conveyance and everything contained herein shall be wholly subject to a perpetual easement for ingress and egress to, from, over and upon the tract herein conveyed for the use of the owner, or owners, of all other tracts of the lands and premises herein described or further described and set forth in said deed of record in Book 90, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, and without restricting the generality of the foregoing clause, the same shall not in any wise be construed as a derogation from the grant hereby affected to the GRANTEE herein and the GRANTOR hereby grants unto the GRANTEE a perpetual easement for ingress and egress to, from, over and upon any or all of the tracts of tracts of lands as described in the aforesaid deed of record in Book 90, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, as may from time to time remain vested in the GRANTOR;

And the GRANTOR covenants with the GRANTEE that it has done no act to encumber the said lands and the GRANTOR releases to the GRANTEE all its claim upon such lands.

Of the lands owned in fee by GRANTOR, DAVY CROCKETT FRONTIER LANDS, Inc., one acre was conveyed to it by the aforementioned deed of record in Book 909, page 591, Register’s Office for Franklin County, Tennessee, which acre has been subdivided into 6,272,640 tracts of one square inch. The tract described in this deed is one of the 6,272,640 tracts. None of the 6,272,640 tracts are cultivated and there are no improvements or buildings upon any of said tracts. Since the tract hereby conveyed is only one square inch, the GRANTEE could not expect to receive any income from the tract and could not expect to occupy the tract. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the corporate seal of the GRANTOR has been affixed in the presence of the proper officers duly authorized in that behalf; the corporate seal of the DAVY CROCKETT FRONTIER LANDS, INC., was hereunto affixed in the presence of:

Jim Blevins, President
Lester York, Secretary-Treasurer

The whole thing sounds pretty airtight to me EXCEPT FOR the part shown above in BOLD. wherein the recorded deed COULD, I suppose, have some nullification or limitation clause that is not restated here.

It also gives me (and every other tract owner) the right to trapse across my (and every other tract owner’s) tract, but in theory I should be able to prevent any and all NON-OWNERS of the tracts from encroaching on the land (I think). IANAL despite the ESQ. appendage. (“RedDawg” was already taken when I lately entered the SDMB realm.)

Let the bidding begin!

Just remember that you’ve gotta have livery of seisin, and seisin can never be in abeyance, and a reversion is different from a possibility of reverter, and some remainders are contingent and some are vested, and some of those that are vested are subject to open, while others are indefeasibly vested, and the Rule Against Perpetuities is another crazy property/future interests doctrine. And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

But Philophocles, didn’t you see that the deed “doth grant, bargain, sell, enfeoff, release, demise, convey, and confirm” to the grantee. Enfeoffment is the livery of seizin.

Besides, this is a deed that appears to be in fee simple absolute (subject to those limitiations of record, which may allow conditional defeanance). Grants in fee are by definition vested and thus not subject to the rule against perpetuities.

It may also depend on whether a subdivision ordinance was in effect at the time the “lot” was created. If so, I’m doubtful as to whether such a lot met the minimum lot size. Moreover, in some localities, the Clerk of the Circuit Court (or whatever office records deeds) merely records the paper and is not recorded to verify that the property that is the subject of the instrument has been legally created (or is even owned by those recording the instrument).

To me this sounds pretty much the same as the “star registry.” I’d be amazed if the deed was considered legally binding in any way.

The key difference there is that the companies selling star names don’t own the stars, or naming rights to them, in the first place, and you obviously can’t sell what you don’t own (yes, I know I’m oversimplifying). By contrast, the Davy Crockett Fronteir Lands Company did, presumably, own this one-acre tract, and is thus allowed to sell all or part of it if they choose. IANAL, of course, but I see no reason why they couldn’t make such a document legally-binding, and I likewise see no reason, if they could, why they wouldn’t. If nothing else, if it weren’t legally binding, then some kid somewhere who bought a square inch would find out about it, and raise a stink, which is not something that this company would want.

My dad has a similar deed to a square inch in Alask, and he did speculate at times on the possibility of buying up three such in a triangle, with one in the middle, and air and mineral rights to others as appropriate, and setting up a tiny tripod oil well. That probably wouldn’t fly, though :).

Only on this board could one non-lawyer post that line to another non-lawyer with an expectation that he’d be understood … more or less. :slight_smile:

A few years ago there was a segment on Dateline, or 60 Minutes or some such show where they went to Montana and stood on a piece of land that was deeded away, inch by inch, in the 50’s on the back of cereal boxes.
The upswing was, forget about building a birdhouse on the dowel you were going to stick in your square inch of land. The rights to the ownership of the parcel had reverted back to the State after X number of years.
But think of the wonderful story if you could prove you owned one square inch of land under Trump Towers in NYC…let’s see, at a gazillion dollars an acre, that square inch would be worth a tidy sum!

I’m afraid to tell you (why it scares me I don’t know) that it was a lawyer posting the line.

IANAL, but doesn’t a deed have to have a legal description of the property in question? How do you make a survey of a property that is one inch on a side. Most ordinary land surveys are done to one in 5000 or so. Maybe with lasers survey equipment that has been improved, but these deeds date from before such gear became common. Anyway, 1 part in 5000 means, it you survey for a mile, you might be off by a foot. So how do you enforce your right to keep others off your property if you don’t even know for sure where it is?

I remember reading at the height of the 80’s real estate craze that the absolute prime land in Tokyo was worth a quarter of a million dollars per square meter. Which would have been about $164 for a square inch.

I’d bend over to pick it up, but I wouldn’t plan to retire on it.
On a separate note, can someone explain something (to a non-lawyer):

Why, if the holder of the Davy Crockett deed can’t expect
to claim anything, did I need title insurance when
I bought my house?

Way back in the '70s, I received a deed for one square inch of land in Black Oak, Arkansas, when I bought an album by the rock group Black Oak Arkansas. (I’m sure you all remember Jim Dandy, don’t you?) I may still have it around somewhere.

Maybe if I got everyone together who bought that album, we might be the owners of one square foot of prime Black Oak real estate.

IANAL, but I believe the purpose of title insurance is to protect the mortgage holder against a mechanic’s lein. It doesn’t have anything to do with possession of the title, at least not directly. In any event, titles/deeds are not good forever under all circumstances.

You poor Tennessee inch-square types might wish to envy us inch-square Yukon Territory types. We at least might have oil up our way. Better, I think, than you Crockett-O-dirt kind. :smiley:

The lot number and subdivision name is the legal description. It refers to a parcel on a recorded subdivision plat, which itself has a legal description. A plat for a subdivision will include all boundary line distances, curve chords and angles, and other measurements necessary to determine the exact location of the parcel.

I feel an Urban Planning 101 lesson coming on …

I guess my question is, how do you make a meaningful plat of 1 x 1 squares, considering the limitations of the surveyer’s art?

This stuff really isn’t covered in Urban Planning 101 - this is the sort of stuff you learn your first 6 months on the job in a Planning Department (and that has always been one of my biggest gripes about the urban planning curriculum, but that’s another thread).

I don’t know what you mean by a “meaningful plat.” Let me see if I can lay it out a little better for you:

  1. I own a piece of property and think, “I’ll split it up into 1 foot by 1 foot squares.” I go to a land surveyor and say “Go out to my property, conduct a boundary survey, and then create 1 foot by 1 foot lots.” The surveyor, being the good business man that he is, does just what he’s told. He goes out, locates corners, and then proceeds to draw a plat of the property showing the corners and lots and lots of little 1 foot by 1 foot squares. His job is done.

  2. My next step depends on the jurisdiction. I can go to the Circuit Court Clerk’s Office (in VA) and say “I want to record a plat of my property.” Depending on the Clerk, he/she’ll say “OK, give me the instrument and give me the filing fee.” His or her work is done. Now, the fact that I’ve recorded the plat does not make the lots exist. All I’ve done is record a piece of paper that shows a bunch of little boxes (I’ve been to court on a similar issue - someone bought a lot that had not been approved by the County and then tried to build a house on it. I had to tell them that they paid $45,000 for a 8.5" x 11" sheet of worthless paper). Alternatively, if the Clerk is on the ball, he or she’ll refer the person to the local planning department so that we can head off just the sort of case I referred to.

  3. I go to the Planning Department and say “I’d like to record this plat.” As Planning Director, my actions are governed bya few things. What does the subdivision ordinance require? What does the zoning ordinance require. In most localities I’d venture to say that a 1’ x 1’ lot isn’t going to meet the minimum lot size, nor is it going to meet tons of other standards that provide for the safe, efficient, and legal creation and division of real estate. As Planning Director, I say, “Sorry, no dice.” You then go to the County Administrator who calls me into his office and I explain the situation to him. He also says “My PD is correct, no dice.” You then go to your member of the Board of Supervisors who comes and gives me a bunch of grief about how I’m not helping his constituent. I tell him “Take it up with the County Administrator - I don’t work for you.” (Just kidding about the last part).

That’s how the system is supposed to work. In some localities, the Clerk of Court (or whatever person records deeds) will record whatever is brought before them. In some jurisdictions, they have no choice (they are not enabled by legislation to require anything of a person requesting the recordation of a plat).

Now, tomorrow we’ll discuss vested rights, reliance on a governmental act, and substantial expenditure as a standard for compelling issuance of a bulding permit (I got sued over that one, too - and it involved the construction of a strip club).

Plnnr - Former Zoning Administrator, Subdivision Agent, and Planning Director