Court Opinion

ID: 9750394
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 14:55:47.101764+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:26:08.653957
License: Public Domain

LARSEN, Justice,
concurring.
I concur in the result reached by the majority in this case, and I would hold that where possession is sufficiently open and notorious to put the true owner on notice of an adverse claim, that possession is hostile.
This Court has always held that the act of hostility necessary to render possession adverse must be brought to the knowledge of the owner of the property, Vlachos v. Witherow, 383 Pa. 174, 118 A.2d 174 (1955), but that it is not necessary for the claimant to even know that there is an owner. Jones v. Porter, 3 Pen. & W. 132 (1831). Hence, hostility is implied when all other elements of adverse possession are established.
Maintaining a locked gate which controlled access to Agate Street, appellant, Tioga Coal Company, made a sufficiently open and notorious claim to the property to put appellee, Supermarkets General Corporation, and its predecessor in interest on notice of appellant’s hostile possession.