Legal Opinion

Beckman v. Redevelopment Authority

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 16, 1977No. Appeal, No. 1822 C.D. 1975PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Mencer,

The issue raised in this appeal from a lower court’s dismissal of preliminary objections to a petition for appointment of viewers is whether the evidence supports an alleged de facto taking.

Helen E. Beckman and Wilson W. Movie (petitioners) are the administrators of the estate of Clarence M. Raible. They are also the administrators of the estate of George J. Raible. During their lifetimes, the Raible brothers individually acquired two contiguous lots by separate deeds apparently executed the same day by the same grantor. The lots were used as a parking lot in the City…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Conroy-Prugh Glass Co. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
  2. In re Condemnation by the CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Espy v. Butler Area Sewer AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  2. Lando v. Urban Redevelopment AuthorityCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1980
  3. Commonwealth v. Greenfield Township—Property OwnersCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API