- Disclaimer
- Proposed Legislation
- State Statutes
- State Statutes Referenced
in MPC
- Other State Statutes
- Land Use Case Law - Court Rulings
KEY TOPICS: PRESCRIPTIVE EASEMENT, SUBDIVISION AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
Koresko v. Farley, et al., (Pa. Cmwlth. 2003), 844 A.2d 607
Note: Appeal denied
Koresko presented the undecided legal question within Pennsylvania’s Court System of whether a prescriptive easement over land arises from encroaching tree roots and overhanging branches. With regards to this question, the Commonwealth Court expressly held that Pennsylvania law does not allow encroaching tree roots and overhanging branches to create a prescriptive easement over land. The court, adopting language from the Court of Appeals of Kansas, stated “[a]ny other result would cause landowners to seek self-help or to litigate each time a piece of vegetation starts to overhang their property for fear of losing the use or partial use of their property as the vegetation grows.” The Court recognized a claim in trespass and the right of a property owner to engage in self-help to remove the offending portion of vegetation.
In addition, the Court stated that the Municipalities Planning Code provided the exclusive means for challenging the validity of a subdivision.
DISCLAIMER:
This site is designed to provide summary review of selected Pennsylvania and Federal Court decisions related to land use and land use controls. The information contained herein, although produced by professionals, is not intended to render any legal service. Nor should the materials herein be utilized as a substitute for professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the service of an attorney or other professional should be sought. DCED makes no representations, warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information provided herein.