Shroder v. Breneman
This text of 21 Pa. 225 (Shroder v. Breneman) 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.
Opinion
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
— This is trespass for building a balcony which over-bung the plaintiff’s land. It was found, upon evidence quite sufficient, that the soil belonged to the plaintiff, though it was subject !to a right of Way, and was used as a private alley. The only point of the case which is strong enough to bear an argument is, that the statute of limitations had extinguished the plaintiff’s title. There was a privy on the ground in dispute, but it is not proved to have been there for twenty-on'e.years. To eke out the case, it was shown that after the privy was removed, the spot it had occupied was used for a dungheap. This will not do. The mere throwing of manure on another's land is not-such an adverse possession as will give any ■right under the statute to him who does it; -much less will it enable a third person to 'say, that the original owner’s title is gone, ■and appropriate it to himself for that reason.
■If we thought the errors assigned to the admission of evidence were important, we would probably examine them -although they are not specified according to the rule. In dismissing them for want of formal correctness, we bring the case-to thesame conclusion it would reach if we decided -them on their merits.
Judgment affirmed.
Lewis, J., dissented.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
21 Pa. 225, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shroder-v-breneman-pa-1853.