Zeglin v. Gahagen

Frank and Tammy Zeglin (plaintiffs) and Sean and Kimberlee Gahagen (defendants) owned adjoining properties in Pennsylvania. In 1995 the Gahagens had a professional survey conducted of their property. The survey showed that a portion of the Gahagens’ property was on the Zeglins’ side of the informal boundary line that had been marked by a row of bushes, a utility pole, and a fence. The Gahagens notified the Zeglins of the encroachment, removed the bushes over the old line, and constructed a retaining wall over the new line. The Zeglins filed a complaint against the Gahagens based on the doctrine of acquiescence of boundary, stating that the Zeglins’ possession and occupation, tacked on to that of their predecessors in title, had acknowledged and acquiesced to the prior boundary as marked by the bushes for a period in excess of 21 years. The trial court found in favor of the Zeglins, affirming that acquiescence of boundary was established by privity of possession, tacking the Zeglins’ 18-year possession to that of their predecessors, thereby exceeding the requisite 21 years. The Gahagens filed an appeal. The appellate court reversed the decision of the trial court, stating that an acquiescence-of-boundary claim required a showing of privity of estate rather than privity of possession. The appellate court determined that privity of estate could not be established, because the previously demarked boundary line could not be passed through title. The Zeglins appealed the decision of the appellate court.