## Facts

- Frank A. Zeglin, Jr. and Tammy Lee Zeglin owned a parcel purchased in 1977; Sean E. and Kimberlee H. Gahagen owned the adjoining parcel purchased in 1989.
- A visible dividing line existed between the properties consisting of bushes, a utility pole, and a fence (the fence added by the Zeglins).
- In 1995, the Gahagens obtained a survey showing the deed boundary lay on the Zeglins’ side of the visible line; a subsequent survey obtained by the Zeglins confirmed the deed-based boundary.
- The Gahagens asserted that part of the Zeglins’ driveway encroached, removed the bushes, and built a retaining wall along the surveyed boundary.
- The Zeglins sued in ejectment and trespass, claiming the visible line was the legal boundary under boundary by acquiescence based on more than 21 years of recognition and possession when combining their possession with predecessors’ possession.

## Issues

1. In a boundary-by-acquiescence claim, must successive landowners show privity of estate to tack periods of possession to meet the 21-year period, or is privity of possession (succession in possession without interruption) sufficient?

## Decision

- The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the Superior Court and reinstated the trial court’s judgment for the Zeglins.
- The Court held that privity of estate is not required to tack possession periods in boundary-by-acquiescence cases.
- The Court concluded that privity of possession—succession in possession showing no break in continuity of recognition and use up to the same visible line—is sufficient for tacking to reach 21 years.

## Legal Principles

- Boundary by acquiescence is a doctrine distinct from adverse possession; it can rest on long-standing mutual recognition of a visible boundary line rather than hostile possession.
- To tack successive periods of possession in boundary-by-acquiescence disputes, Pennsylvania requires privity of possession (continuity of possession and recognition of the same line), not privity of estate.
- A continuity-focused privity rule serves the policy of stability and repose in land titles by protecting long-respected practical boundaries from later disruption based solely on deed descriptions.

## Conclusion

The court held that boundary by acquiescence may be established through tacking based on uninterrupted succession in possession and recognition of a visible boundary line for at least 21 years, without requiring a title-based conveyance of the disputed strip, and it restored judgment recognizing the visible line as the boundary.


Zeglin v. Gahagen, 812 A.2d 558 (Pa. 2002)