Legal Opinion · Dissent

Borough v. Godfrey

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 27, 2012Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge BROBSON.

The unambiguous statutory language at issue in this case requires “[a]ny person ... who ... has violated ... the provisions of any zoning ordinance enacted under this act or prior enabling laws” to “pay a judgment.” Section 617.2(a) of the Municipalities Planning Code (MPC) (emphasis added).1 A judgment of $0.00 does not require a violator to pay anything: Thus, the trial court’s refusal to assess a monetary judgment against Gary D. Godfrey is contrary to the General Assembly’s intent that all violators “pay” something.

For this reason, I respectfully…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Lower Mount Bethel Township v. North River Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API