Weible, R. v. Wells, W.
156 A.3d 1220
Pa. Super. Ct.2017Background
- Neighboring owners: Weible (703 E. Main) bought title in 1998 from Jefferson and Clearfield Counties; the Wellses own 717 E. Main (deed 1965).
- Wellses installed landscaping (1975) and a driveway (1979) that encroached onto the parcel later conveyed to the Counties and then to Weible (subject property). They maintained and used that area openly and continuously for decades.
- Counties used the subject parcel to house/provide services to mentally disabled persons from May 1995 to Dec. 1998.
- In 2008 a fallen tree revealed that the Wellses’ improvements were on Weible’s surveyed land; Weible commissioned a new survey and demanded removal.
- Weible sued in ejectment (2009); Wellses counterclaimed to quiet title and pleaded adverse possession. After a non-jury trial the court found Wellses had possessed the land openly for over 21 years but concluded the 21-year period was reset because the land was owned/used by the Counties during 1995–1998. Trial court ordered ejectment; Wellses appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Weible's Argument | Wellses' Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Wellses proved adverse possession (21 yrs: actual, continuous, exclusive, visible, notorious, distinct, hostile) | Wells lacked requisite uninterrupted 21 years because only 11 years elapsed after Counties sold to Weible | Wells proved continuous, open, exclusive possession from installation (1975/1979) through trial, satisfying all elements | Court held Wellses satisfied the elements and established 21 years (after tolling); reversed ejectment |
| Effect of Counties’ 1995–1998 ownership on the 21‑year period: toll or reset? | The period reset when Counties owned the parcel; statute starts anew against successor owner | The Counties’ ownership only tolled/suspended the running of the 21‑year statutory period; Wellses’ prior years count toward 21 years | Court held the period was tolled (not reset) while Counties owned/used the land, so Wellses met 21 years overall |
| Whether Counties’ public use/immunity prevents adverse possession against successor owner | Counties’ public use means adverse possession cannot run and thus years do not count against successor | Even if Counties were immune from adverse‑possession claims, immunity only bars suit and tolls the period; it does not erase adverse use by Wellses vis‑à‑vis a future private purchaser | Court found Counties’ use was public (so claim against Counties barred) but that immunity tolled the statute only; continuous adverse use by Wellses persisted |
| Whether trial court properly ordered Wellses to pay/resurvey and accept Alexander survey | Alexander’s survey was presumptively correct; Wellses failed to contest and thus must resurvey/pay | Wellses disputed boundary and adverse‑possession claim but argued survey findings conflicted with their established possession | Court reversed order requiring resurvey/payment because title should be vested in Wellses by adverse possession; remanded to enter judgment for Wellses |
Key Cases Cited
- Flannery v. Stump, 786 A.2d 255 (Pa. Super. 2001) (elements and 21‑year requirement for adverse possession)
- Torch v. Constantino, 323 A.2d 278 (Pa. Super. 1974) (statute of limitations for adverse possession is tolled against political subdivisions holding land for governmental functions)
- Reed v. Wolyniec, 471 A.2d 80 (Pa. Super. 1983) (continuity element and interruption principles for adverse possession)
- Brennan v. Manchester Crossings, 708 A.2d 815 (Pa. Super. 1998) (exclusive possession need not be absolute; typical owner’s use suffices)
- Showalter v. Pantaleo, 9 A.3d 233 (Pa. Super. 2010) (distinguishing tolling where property became part of a bankruptcy estate and acts of dominion interrupted adverse‑possession accrual)