Jones v. McConnell

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Jones v. McConnell

186 A.2d 915, 409 Pa. 455, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 688

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedJanuary 8, 1963

DocketAppeals, Nos. 219 and 224

StatusPublished

This text of 186 A.2d 915 (Jones v. McConnell) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Jones v. McConnell, 186 A.2d 915, 409 Pa. 455, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 688 (Pa. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam,

These appeals are from an order sustaining preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer to a complaint in equity. The ruling was correct.

Giving the plaintiff the benefit of all properly pleaded facts, as we must for the purposes of these appeals, no cause of action was set forth.

The deed from the plaintiff to the Commonwealth Real Estate Company for the land involved, without limitation as to use, was a complete, valid conveyance in fee simple, which effectively extinguished, absolutely and immediately, the tenancy in common. The subsequent conveyance by the Commonwealth Real Estate Company to the County of Allegheny did not render this initial conveyance a nullity. The cotenancy having ended, one of the former cotenants was not precluded from subsequently reacquiring title to the land or a portion thereof. See Reynolds’ Estate, 239 Pa. 314, 86 A. 858 (1913).

Further, if the County of Allegheny exceeded its legal powers in acquiring title to the land involved, this is a matter between the county and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Commonwealth alone may question the county’s want of legal capacity. See, McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, §28.21 (3d ed. 1950); City of Champaign v. Harmon, 98 Ill. 491 (1881) ; Chambers v. City of St. Louis, 29 Mo. 543 (1860).

Order affirmed. Costs upon the appellant.

Mr. Justice Keim took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

Per Curiam,

These appeals are from an order sustaining preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer to a complaint in equity. The ruling was correct.

Giving the plaintiff the benefit of all properly pleaded facts, as we must for the purposes of these appeals, no cause of action was set forth.

The deed from the plaintiff to the Commonwealth Real Estate Company for the land involved, without limitation as to use, was a complete, valid conveyance in fee simple, which effectively extinguished, absolutely and immediately, the tenancy in common. The subsequent conveyance by the Commonwealth Real Estate Company to the County of Allegheny did not render this initial conveyance a nullity. The cotenancy having ended, one of the former cotenants was not precluded from subsequently reacquiring title to the land or a portion thereof. See Reynolds’ Estate, 239 Pa. 314, 86 A. 858 (1913).

Further, if the County of Allegheny exceeded its legal powers in acquiring title to the land involved, this is a matter between the county and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Commonwealth alone may question the county’s want of legal capacity. See, McQuillin, Municipal Corporations, §28.21 (3d ed. 1950); City of Champaign v. Harmon, 98 Ill. 491 (1881) ; Chambers v. City of St. Louis, 29 Mo. 543 (1860).

Order affirmed. Costs upon the appellant.

Mr. Justice Keim took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

186 A.2d 915, 409 Pa. 455, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 688, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jones-v-mcconnell-pa-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack