Legal Opinion

Martin v. Sun Pipe Line Co.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided September 20, 1995PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION OF THE COURT

CASTILLE, Justice.

This appeal concerns a dispute over whether an easement, which was granted to the Sun Pipe Line Company (“Sun Pipe Line”) pursuant to a life estate, turned into a prescriptive easement by virtue of Sun Pipe Line’s alleged use of that easement after the termination of the life estate. Because the acquisition of a prescriptive easement through “unenclosed woodland” is prohibited by statute, we hold that the trial court was correct in granting appellants’ motion for summary judgment.

The relevant facts establish the following: On August 22, 1928, John N.…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Thompson Coal Co. v. Pike Coal Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1979
  2. Marks v. TasmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
  3. Bodman v. BodmanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  4. Kurtz v. HokeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
  5. Humberston v. HumbertSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1979

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Leichtfuss v. DabneyMontana Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Williams, D. v. Taylor, H.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. White v. City of PhiladelphiaCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  4. Tricker v. Pennsylvania Turnpike CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1998
  5. Kuhstoss, B. v. Steele, D.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2020

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API