Court Opinion

ID: 9749218
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:28:23.454803+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:45.204171
License: Public Domain

Dissenting Opinion by
Mr. Justice Cohen :
The meager authority upon which the majority bases its conclusion that laches is applicable does not satisfy me. It introduces into our law of property a new concept, namely, that one may obtain title to real*124ty on the weakness of the titleholder’s claim rather than on the strength of his own.
In Pennsylvania, the Implied-Trust Doctrine places the title of this real estate in the congregation that organized the church. I know of no theory of laches that is applicable to such a situation so as to divest from ownership those in whom title is vested.
Further, in this instance, prejudice, which is an ingredient of laches, has not been shown; neither has adverse possession — which might be applicable — been alleged.
Since the record does not disclose facts which would permit the application of laches, and since it does disclose facts which would indicate adverse possession, I would apply the Implied-Trust Doctrine and reverse the decree.
I dissent.