Schmitt v. Carbondale

Citations

• 257 Pa. 451
• 101 A. 755
• 1917 Pa. LEXIS 758

Syllabus

<p>Evidence — Ancient documents — Real property — Dedication—Adverse possession — Public parks — Condemnation proceedings — Estoppel.</p> <p>1. A map, found in the office of a corporation which had conveyed land shown upon the map, is admissible in evidence as an ancient document where it is shown to be more than thirty years old, is to all appearances genuine and has been acted upon.</p> <p>2. A citizen acquires no rights against the public by the maintenance of a fence or building in a highway and the same rule applies to a public park.</p> <p>3. Where a building has been erected upon land which had been dedicated to the public for use as a public park, the passage of a municipal ordinance providing for the condemnation of the land occupied by such building does not estop the municipality from claiming the property, especially where no viewers were appointed ' and nothing further was done in reference to the ordinance.</p> <p>4. A canal company owning a tract of land in a village laid the land out in lots, and left a triangular piece for public use as a park. The purchaser of a lot abutting upon the park fenced in a part of the land which had been dedicated to the public. The encroachment existed for more than thirty years. Such property owner was proceeding to make additions to a building so as to extend it over the land lying in the park when he was prevented by the city officials. He brought a bill in equity to restrain the city officials from interfering with his additions to the property. It appeared that the city had passed an ordinance years before, providing for the condemnation of the land occupied by plaintiff, but no viewers were appointed and no further steps were taken. Plaintiff claimed that the city was estopped by such action to allege that the land was not his and also that he had acquired title by adverse possession. Held, the lower court did not err in dismissing the bill.</p>