181 A.3d 1289
Pa. Commw. Ct.2018Background
- The City condemned and obtained title to a vacant lot in 1974 to facilitate rerouting of the Frankford Elevated and I-95 construction; the Commonwealth filed a later condemnation notice indicating a temporary easement and that the Commonwealth would permanently retain right-of-way. The construction was completed in the late 1970s.
- The City did not occupy or maintain the Property after the project; it retained the land for possible future disposition.
- In 1989 Galdo purchased a house across the street and for decades used a portion of the Property (the “Galdo Parcel”) for storage, parking, recreational features, and made physical improvements.
- The City posted removal notices on the Property in February 2013; Galdo removed the notices and refused to vacate.
- The City sued for ejectment in 2014; Galdo counterclaimed to quiet title by adverse possession. The trial court ruled for the City, holding adverse possession could not lie because the City acted at the Commonwealth’s behest and the land was devoted to public use. The Commonwealth Court vacated and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether adverse possession can run against the City because it condemned the Property at the Commonwealth’s behest (agency theory) | Galdo: The temporary agency/condemnation relationship ended with project completion, so nullum tempus against the Commonwealth does not protect the City. | City: City acted as the Commonwealth’s agent in condemning/holding the land and so should enjoy Commonwealth immunity from adverse possession. | Court: Rejected blanket immunity from Commonwealth protection; agency based on the temporary condemnation ended with project completion, so City not automatically immune. |
| Whether the Property was devoted to public use so as to bar adverse possession | Galdo: The City did not use or maintain the land for public use for decades; mere retention for resale does not equal public use. | City: Retention for eventual disposition (after condemnation) is a public use and tolls prescriptive period. | Court: Held City did not hold the Property pursuant to a continuing legal obligation or public use here; public-use immunity did not apply. |
| Whether City waived its immunity defense by procedural posture (failure to raise in a new matter) | Galdo: City waived immunity by not raising it appropriately. | City: Properly raised; coordinate-jurisdiction and summary-judgment differences justify rulings. | Court: The opinion focuses on immunity/substance and remands for factual findings on adverse possession elements; did not adopt trial court’s waiver conclusion. |
| Whether Galdo proved the elements of adverse possession | Galdo: He occupied the Galdo Parcel openly, continuously, exclusively, notoriously, and hostilely for the statutory period. | City: Contests adverse possession; argued immunity and public-use defenses. | Court: Remanded — because trial court decided on immunity, it made no findings on the seven elements; trial court must determine whether Galdo proved actual, continuous, exclusive, visible, notorious, distinct, and hostile possession for 21 years. |
Key Cases Cited
- Dep’t of Transp. v. J. W. Bishop & Co., 439 A.2d 101 (Pa. 1981) (discusses nullum tempus doctrine and Commonwealth protection from adverse possession)
- Evans v. Erie County, 66 Pa. 222 (Pa. 1870) (municipalities are not protected by nullum tempus; adverse possession can run against political subdivisions)
- Torch v. Constantino, 323 A.2d 278 (Pa. Super. 1974) (adverse possession does not run against local government where land is held for public use such as tax-sale disposition)
- Lysicki v. Montour Sch. Dist., 701 A.2d 630 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1997) (school districts may be immune from adverse possession when holding land to fulfill Commonwealth education responsibilities)
- Bruker v. Burgess & Town Council of Carlisle, 102 A.2d 418 (Pa. 1954) (adverse possession cannot be asserted against land devoted to public use)