# Are the SUBJECT parcels clouded by the fraudulent deeds? — Evidence-based analysis

**Subjects:** R32905-401-5010 (Rutter, 4927 Katya Ln) and R32905-400-4740 (Garibyan, 4924 Katya Ln)
**Date:** 2026-08-15 | **Not legal advice** — confirm with your title company's plat examiner / a
licensed surveyor and your attorney.

## Short answer
**Yes — for practical purposes your two parcels are within the affected area and should be treated
as clouded**, but the *precise legal-description overlap* is a plat-level question that only your
title company's plat examiner or a licensed surveyor can resolve definitively. Here is exactly what
the records show and where the uncertainty lies.

## Which fraudulent deed is relevant
Of the three land-patent quitclaims, only **Schermer QCD #4583924** touches your township. It claims:
> "...Lots 3 and 4, and the SW¼ NW¼ of **Section 4**, and **Lot 1 of Section 5, all in T29N R3E**...
> 171.30 acres..."
The other two (Shroyer #4582708, Ingalls #4583923) claim land in **T30N R3E** (Sections 29/32/33) —
a different township to the north — so they do **not** describe your land.

## What is CERTAIN (from the county records we captured)
1. **Same section.** Both your parcels are in **Section 5, T29N R3E** — the exact section Schermer's
   deed names. Your legals: *"IN E/2 NE: BG NWCR S/2 SE NE..."* (both), i.e., in the **E½ of the NE¼**,
   specifically the **S½ of the SE¼ NE¼**, platted as **SP 79-192**.
2. **You were inside the affected-area map.** In the georeferenced affected cluster both parcels are
   classed **SUBJECT** (inside the neighbor's red outline); Paul Neis (R32905-532-4810, "Lot 7 SP
   82-33") is **WITHIN**. All three sit inside the affected outline.
3. **You are spatially embedded among the "Government Lot 1" parcels.** Parcels expressly described
   as *"IN GL 1"* of Section 5 (e.g., R32905-467-4150, -496-4441, -547-4090, and the -380-53xx group
   that combines *"N/2 SE NE & GL1"*) occupy centroids spanning **lon −122.4474…−122.4413,
   lat 48.0313…48.0364**. Your parcels' centroids (−122.4424/−122.4436, lat 48.0321/48.0323) fall
   **inside that footprint** — you are interspersed with the Government-Lot-1 parcels, not clearly
   outside them.

## What is NUANCED (needs authoritative confirmation)
4. **Your legal description is by aliquot part + short plat ("E/2 NE / S/2 SE NE ... SP 79-192"),
   NOT expressly "Government Lot 1."** Schermer's deed claims **Government Lot 1** of Section 5 — a
   specific ~40–50-acre fractional (meander) lot from the original 1800s GLO survey. Whether the
   metes-and-bounds of *your* short-plat lots physically lie inside the boundary of that Government
   Lot 1 is a **plat-overlay determination**. The parcel-level records are *consistent with overlap*
   (same section, embedded among GL1 parcels, inside the affected map) but do not by themselves prove
   the exact boundary. The authoritative sources are the **BLM/GLO official plat for T29N R3E Sec 5**
   plus your **title company's plat examiner** (who indexes by land, not name).

## Practical bottom line (why this matters even without exact overlap)
5. Regardless of the aliquot-vs-Government-Lot technicality:
   - the fraudulent deed **claims your section** with a sweeping "land patent" theory;
   - your parcels are **inside the affected cluster**; and
   - title underwriters are **declining to insure transactions in this area** (per the Auditor's
     email) until the deeds are cleared.
   So a title company will very likely treat **your** title as clouded/affected too. **Treat your
   property as clouded and pursue the same remedies** as the other owners (certified copies of
   #4583924, an owner's title-insurance claim + written underwriting denial, and quiet-title / the
   County's LAR action). Do **not** contact or pay the filers.

## The one question to put to your title company / surveyor (verbatim)
> "Does the boundary of **Government Lot 1 of Section 5, T29N R3E** (per the official GLO plat)
> overlap my parcels **R32905-401-5010** and **R32905-400-4740** (SP 79-192, in the E½ NE / S½ SE¼NE¼)?
> If so, fraudulent Quitclaim Deed **#4583924** (Schermer, rec. 04/01/2025) directly describes my
> land; please confirm it as a title exception and its effect on insurability."

## Correction to an earlier statement
An earlier note said Neis's parcel is "clouded by Lot 1 of Section 5." More precisely: Neis
(R32905-532-4810) is **"Lot 7 of Short Plat 82-33"** — an aliquot/short-plat description, the same
situation as your parcels. He, you, and the other cluster owners share the identical open question
of exact Government-Lot-1 overlap, and the identical practical cloud.