Miller & Son Paving, Inc. v. Plumstead Township
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
We granted allocatur to determine whether the Commonwealth Court erred in holding that a township zoning ordinance, which was found unconstitutional due to its exclusion of quarrying as a permitted use, automatically effected a compensable temporary de facto taking of the landowner’s property. For the reasons that follow, we reverse the order of the Commonwealth Court and hold that a per se compensable taking does not result from a zoning ordinance which is ultimately declared invalid.
On June 17, 1988, Miller and Son Paving, Inc., (Miller/Appellee), purchased…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- First English Evangelical Lutheran Church v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- United Artists' Theater Circuit, Inc. v. City of PhiladelphiaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
- Zettlemoyer v. Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- McClimans v. Board of SupervisorsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
- Gaebel v. Thornbury TownshipCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1973
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Adams Outdoor Adv., Lp. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of Smithfield TownshipCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- Pheasant Bridge Corp. v. Township of WarrenSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2001
- MacHipongo Land and Coal Co., Inc. v. Com.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Clay County Ex Rel. County Commission of Clay v. Harley & Susie Bogue, Inc.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1999
- Thomas A. McElwee & Son, Inc. v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.