Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

FRANK E. LONGO AND MAMIE L. LONGO v. JOSEPH SAMUEL RAGO AND JOSEPHINE RAGO (06/05/81)

filed: June 5, 1981.

FRANK E. LONGO AND MAMIE L. LONGO, APPELLANTS,
v.
JOSEPH SAMUEL RAGO AND JOSEPHINE RAGO



No. 989 April Term, 1979, Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, Civil Division No. GD 78-27674.

COUNSEL

Louis Lessem, Pittsburgh, for appellants.

Dennis St. J. Mulvihill, Pittsburgh, for appellees.

Spaeth, Wickersham and Lipez, JJ.

Author: Lipez

[ 287 Pa. Super. Page 509]

The court below sustained appellees' preliminary objection in the nature of a demurrer to appellants' complaint. We reverse and remand.

Appellants' complaint alleges, in relevant part:

[ 287 Pa. Super. Page 5107]

. Beginning on or before January 6, 1946, Plaintiffs enjoyed a free and uninterrupted use of such driveway portion of Defendants' property for the purpose of ingress and egress by foot and by vehicular traffic to reach the rear portion of their property.

8. Plaintiffs' predecessors in title since October 8, 1920 had enjoyed a free and uninterrupted use of said driveway for the purpose of ingress and egress by foot and later by vehicular traffic to reach the rear portion of what is now Plaintiffs' property.

9. Said use continued until in or around 1974 when the gate in a fence, which had been constructed in or around 1969, was locked for the first time, thereby denying to the Plaintiffs use of the aforementioned driveway.

10. Plaintiffs aver that the use of said driveway by them and by their predecessors in title was open, visible, continuous and notorious, and that said use had continued for more than twenty-one years.

12. Plaintiffs further aver that although Defendants acquired their property in 1952, no attempt was made at time nor [sic] at any subsequent to restrict Plaintiffs' use of the driveway until 1974 when said gate ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.