re: property registration - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

27-ET-CV-14-456 Flied In Fourth Judicial District Court 9/102014 2:27:14 PM � Examiner of Titles,MN � defendants the occupants of said land whose names must be ascertained by the applicants' attorney and listed in the Land Title Summons. I recommend as defendants the owners and encumbrancers of the adjoining Lot 175, which is registered property, currently disclosed by the records of the Hennepin County Registrar of Titles to be Marv F. Drazan and Michael Drazan, as joint tenants, as shown by Certificate of Title No. 1111495, and I again recommend Mortaaae Electronic Reaistration Svstems, Inc., as nominee for Summit Mortaaste Coraoration, a Mtnnesota coraoratfon, as shown by Doc. No. 4949892. I also recommend as defendants the occupants of said land whose names must be ascertained by the applicants' attomey and listed in the Land Title Summons. As previously mentioned, the land adjoining to the southwest is registered and therefore the Order and Decree of Registration should contain an additional Order to the Registrar of Titles, as follows: IT IS FURTHER ORDERED,that the Registrar of Titles: receive for registration on Certificate of Title No. 1111495, a certified copy of the plat of survey on file in Case No. 27-ET-CV-14-456, showing the placement of Judicial Landmarks, and show by memorial on said Certificate of Title that the northwesterly boundary line of the land described therein has been marked by Judicial Landmarks; and in future Certificates of Title issued for the land described in said Certificate of Title, the Registrar place in the body of said Certificate of Title immediately following the land description the statement "The northwesterly boundary line of the above-described land has been marked by Judiciai Landmarks set pursuant to Order in Case No. 27-ET-CV- 14-456(Document No. [Registrar insert document number assigned to this Orderj)." (c) Abstract entry no. 62 contains a permanent easemen for utility purposes and underground sewer granted in 1966 in favor of the Village of Orono over, under, and across the southwesterly 5 feet of the land to be registered. The Application and the Inspec�on Report make no mention of this easement. I assume there will be evidence at the hearing to support a Finding in the Order to be entered in this matter that the easement recoMed wifh the County Recorder as Document No. 3622491 no longer affects the land being registered and has terminated by abandonment If said easement still affects the land, then the following concluding statement shauld be contained in the"subject clause"of the Decree of Registration: To a permanent easement for utility purposes in favar of the City of Orono over, under, and across the southwesterly 5 feet of above land, County Recorder poc. No. 3622491. I recommend the Citv of Orono as a defendant. 4