Legal Opinion
Borough of Edgeworth v. Lilly
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided November 3, 1989No. 983 C.D. 1989PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NARICK, Senior Judge.
Arthur Lilly (Lilly) appeals from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County that determined, pursuant to a declaratory action filed by the Borough of Edge-worth (Edgeworth), that a disputed section of Hazel Lane 1 is owned by Catherine Russo (Russo) by virtue of adverse possession. We affirm.
I. PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Edgeworth commenced the action for declaratory judgment against Lilly, Russo and the other defendants 2 requesting that the trial court determine the rights of the parties relating to a portion of Hazel Lane which abuts Russo’s property. 3
The…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Quicksall v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1896
- Milford Borough v. BurnettSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1927
- Conneaut Lake Park, Inc. v. KlingensmithSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Hostetter v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1951
- Estojak v. MazsaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Tobin v. Radnor Township Board of CommissionersCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
- Smith v. Borough of New HopeCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Catalano v. BujakCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Catalano v. BujakCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Friedman, B. v. Murphy, M.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2019