Legal Opinion
Woll S. v. Monaghan Township
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Decided May 22, 2008No. 1888 C.D. 2007PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
Judge McGINLEY.
Colby and Monica Woll (Landowners) appeal from the order of the Court of Common Pleas of York County (common pleas court) affirming the Monaghan Township Zoning Hearing Board (Board) decision that Landowners were in violation of Sections 201.2 and 112.C of the Mona-ghan Township Ordinance (Ordinance) which limited the maximum number of domestic pets at any one single-family residence, as an accessory use, to no more than six.
Landowners live in a rural residential zone (RR) in Monaghan Township. They have fourteen dogs,. There is no fence around the property and the…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Schubach v. SilverSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Bilbar Construction Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Cleaver v. Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1964
- C & M Developers, Inc. v. Bedminster Township Zoning Hearing BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Downing v. CookOhio Supreme Court · 1982
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kohl v. New Sewickley Township Zoning Hearing BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2015
- Plaxton v. Lycoming County Zoning Hearing BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Hess v. Warwick Township Zoning Hearing BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
- Board of Supervisors of Willistown Twp. v. Main Line Gardens, Inc. and Coffman Associates, LLCCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Borough of West Conshohocken v. SoppickCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2017
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.