Kreamer v. Voneida

Citations

• 24 Pa. Super. 347
• 1904 Pa. Super. LEXIS 183

Syllabus

<p>Ejectment — Service of writ — Nonresident defendant — Publication of rule to appear and plead — Possession—Practice, C. P. — Acts of April 13, 1807— April 14, 1851, P. L. 612, and April 13, 1858, P. L. 256.</p> <p>Where a sheriff's return to a writ of ejectment for unseated land shows that the land was unoccupied, that the defendant did not reside in the county, and had no agent in charge of the land in the county, and that notice of the suit was given personally to the defendant in another county, and the record further shows an appearance for the defendant, but fails to show a rule on defendant to appear and plead with publication thereof as provided by the Acts of April 14, 1851, P. L. 612, and April 13, 1858, P. L. 256, the return and the record raises no presumption that the defendant was in possession of the land described in the writ.</p> <p>Land law — Abandonment of title — Payment of taxes.</p> <p>The doctrine of abandonment is only applicable where the title affected is inchoate or imperfect. Where a title has passed by patent from the commonwealth it is never reinvested by abandonment.</p> <p>Constructive possession of unoccupied land follows the legal title. Every owner is presumed to be in possession until ousted by an actual occupant, and the omission of the owner to take physical possession of his land for a long period does not effect a forfeiture of his title unless such nonoccupancy by the owner is accompanied by an actual adverse, continuous, notorious and exclusive possession by an intruder for such a length of time as would give title under the statute of limitations. Nor will the failure of the owner to pay taxes produce a forfeiture. ... •</p>