Quiet Title Action Dedication of Street to the Public for Railroad Use Statute of Limitations Implicit Evidence of Vacating Property
Zalman v. City of Chester, PICS Case No. 17-1123 (Pa. Commw. June 27, 2017) Colins, J. (20 pages).
Portion of street in use by railroad track was dedicated to the public use prior to implementation of 21-year statute of limitations, evidenced by charter granted by the commonwealth to a railroad corporation to construct the railway. Order of the trial court affirmed.
Bernard and Sandra Zalman and the city of Chester cross-appealed from the order of the trial court quieting title to a portion of Yarnall Street and a portion of West Front Street located within the city. Appellants owned properties at the northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of Yarnall and West Front Streets, which was in an area previously dominated by railroad tracks and industrial properties. Appellants filed the present quiet title action to determine whether they or the city were legal owners of portions of Yarnall and West Front Streets. After a trial, the trial court ruled that the portion of West Front Street abutting appellants' property belonged to the city, while the western half of Yarnall Street stretching from the intersection to the southern boundary of appellants' property belonged to appellants.
The parties' cross-appeals sought to affirm the portion of the trial court's order quieting title in their favor and reverse the portion that quieted title in the other party's favor. Appellants argued that the trial court erred in concluding that West Front Street was dedicated to the public prior to the passage of the Act of 1889 and that the 21-year statute of limitations set forth in the act was inapplicable. The city argued that the trial court erred in concluding that the city had vacated the portion of Yarnall Street in dispute, because the city never passed an ordinance expressly vacating the street.
As to West Front Street, appellants argued that the record demonstrated that the borough of South Chester, later incorporated into the city, granted the right to construct a freight railway across private property on what is now West Front Street prior to its plotting or construction, such that there was no dedication or acceptance by South Chester. Appellants further argued that there was no evidence that West Front Street was used by the public prior to the Act of 1889. The court rejected appellants' argument, first noting that the Act of 1889 was conclusively held to have no retroactive effect. The court held that appellants' contention that the railway constructed on West Front Street was not a public use because it was a freight railway or contract carrier was irrelevant because West Front Street was dedicated and accepted prior to the Act of 1889. The court found that the property's original owner incorporated a railroad and built the road and railway prior to South Chester's adoption of a street system, which was later ratified by the street committee. The court noted that the rail company was later subject to litigation for abusing their charter privileges by preventing safe passage by the public along West Front Street. The court held that such evidence was sufficient to demonstrate dedication and acceptance.