In Rio Bravo Oil Co. et al V. J.F. Weed, et al, what generally prevails in case of an error between specific descriptions?

In legal cases involving land descriptions, metes and bounds descriptions typically prevail in the event of discrepancies or errors with other types of descriptions, such as lot and block number descriptions. This principle is grounded in the nature of metes and bounds, which provide a detailed account of boundary lines using physical landmarks, distances, and angles, allowing for a more precise identification of property boundaries.

The rationale behind this preference is that metes and bounds convey a more accurate and site-specific depiction of the property in question. They directly reflect the intent of the parties regarding the exact configuration and extent of ownership. In contrast, lot and block descriptions are based on recorded subdivision plats and may contain generalizations that are less specific about the actual boundaries.

Other options, such as previous surveyor recommendations or agreements with adjoining landowners, may provide context or assistance in interpreting boundaries but do not carry the same authoritative weight as a detailed metes and bounds description. Thus, in disputes involving descriptions of property boundaries, metes and bounds descriptions take precedence when conflicts arise.