Possessky v. Diem
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
SAYLOR, Judge:
This is an appeal from an order entered in the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County denying Appellant, Francis Possessky, an easement by implication or necessity, denying the motion of Appellees, Franklin and Barbara Diem and Frank and Cindy Diem, to vacate summary judgment entered in favor of Possessky, and denying Appellees’ petition for costs, attorneys fees and civil penalty.
Possessky claims an easement by necessity or implication across lands (Tracts B and C) owned by Franklin and Barbara Diem and Frank and Cindy Diem. On February 28, 1991, Possessky purchased property…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Commonwealth v. YoungSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- E.J.M. v. Archdiocese of PhiladelphiaSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Becker v. RittenhouseSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1929
- Brenckle v. ArblasterSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- General Accident Fire & Life Assurance Corp. v. FlaminiSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Phillippi v. KnotterSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Daddona v. ThorpeSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- Berg v. Georgetown Builders, Inc.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Graff v. ScanlanCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- Kochan v. COM., DEPT. OF TRANSP.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.