Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hoffman Mining Co. v. Zoning Hearing Board

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided November 23, 2011No. 23 WAP 2009Published

1ConcurrenceChief Justice Castille

I concur in the result reached by the Majority and join its analysis, insofar as that analysis goes; I also join Mr. Justice Saylor’s Concurring Opinion, as I will explain below. The Majority appears to review all of appellant’s claims through the prism of the express preemption clause of the Surface Mining Conservation and Reclamation Act (the “Surface Mining Act”), 52 P.S. § 1396.17a. While such an analysis accounts for some of appellant’s arguments, the bulk of appellant’s field and conflict preemption points are not directly addressed. The oversight may be a consequence of imprecise…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Harris-Walsh, Inc. v. Dickson City BoroughSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1966
  2. Council of Middletown Township v. BenhamSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  3. Huntley & Huntley, Inc. v. Council of OakmontSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
  4. Duff v. Township of NorthamptonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  5. Miller & Son Paving, Inc. v. Wrightstown TownshipSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API