upr000186 173

5* I called Mr. Sweeney of the Pioneer Title Company and gave hi® the above facts and he stated that his company had not Issued the Deed but that the ffevada Title Guarantee handling same. Company was 6, Apparently Mr, MaePeek was Informed of our activities and he came into my office on the evening of February 25th, Inquiring to what could be done about this matter, I Informed hi® that he was constructing his building over an easement held by this company wouldJ 1abaet w1 il*l?iJn®gn d?tod pta0 y the ex» pennostei ceo fo nr ehliomc,a tinHge thien dpiicpaet edl inteh ato uthe­side the limits of the building provided there was enough room bet­ween building foundations and the north line of Lot N. Mr, MaePeek then raised the question as to whether the pipe line was actually on the easement and decided he would dig it up In a few places and deter- stihleCrM wIotrs de xfarcot® lMro.c atMiaoenP.e ek.Up to the present moment I have had no fur­7 » I called Mr, Cory with regard to this matter and requested of the prpro®peparrtey ai nn ootridefri catthaito n thteo Hcro,m pMaaneyP’es eki natnedr estthse mTiigthlte -hboe ldfeurlsl y protected. See attached copy of notice dated February 27, 1953 which was signed by me and served by Mr. M.B. Davie of this office, who is pr2es»i,dle9n*t? of the Valley EntIedrlptrhi sAe*s , Inc, It Mwr.a s «.nCe.c eMsaseaPreye kt,o sienr evesc rtohwe. title holders since Mr. MaePeek stated that deed is still 8. On March 3rd I contacted Mr. Shelley, City Manager of Las Vegas, and discussed this patter with him. I told him that they had ed that they had fnoor kbnuoiwlldeidngge ovtehart outrh erpei pew asl inae piepaes emleinnet aant d thhei s slt&otc-a - H ° a ana that he did not see how they could do anything about it since he a i d not feel it was their responsibility to search the title every time they issued a building permit, but had to rely on the owner’s statement as to ownership of the property, I can see Mr. Shelley’s position and told him that I was merely furnishing him this informa­tion with the thought that he would like to know that we were the oswtnreurcst inogf aa nb euaisledmienngt unatd ert hCe itlyo cpaetrimoint .where Mr. MaePeek was now con­ther a9*c tionI asghaouilnd dbies cutsaskeedn tihni st himsa ttmaetrt weirt hs inMcr,e CMro.r yM aase Peteok w hias t nofwur­proceeding with the construction of this building. Mr. MaePeek was served with the notice referred to above and stated that he was fully aware of the eacrouehment on the easement. He also stated that he was fully aware of his responsibilities in the matter and that he woubd have to suffer the consequences in the event It became necessary t© eater upon the easement for necessary repairs to water line. 10. Mr. Cory stated that it would be possible to serve him with an Injunction to stop construction, provided he could prove irreparable damages, which I do not believe could be proved. In view of the above I do not feel that we should take action to prevent Mr. MaePeek fro® constructing his building over the pipe line easement, and recommend that we do nothing further la the matter until siunc hth et iEmae seamse nitt. may become necessary to exercise our rights as provided L.R. Mas