Legal Opinion
In Re Condemnation by the Urban Redevelopment Authority
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided July 12, 1991No. 45 W.D. Appeal Docket 1989PublishedCited by 23 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ZAPPALA, Justice.
E-V Company and Keller Office Equipment Company (hereinafter condemnees) filed preliminary objections to a declaration of taking filed on October 9, 1981, by the Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh (URA). Allegheny County Common Pleas Court overruled the objections and Commonwealth Court affirmed. 117 Pa.Cmwlth. 475, 544 A.2d 87. We granted their petition for allowance of appeal limited to the questions: 1) “whether the condemnees have been unconstitutionally denied a meaningful hearing at a meaningful time to challenge the certification of blight____” and 2)…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Armstrong v. ManzoSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Conroy-Prugh Glass Co. v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Crawford v. Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- OLIVER v. ClairtonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1953
- Snelling v. Department of TransportationCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1976
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Mazur v. Trinity Area School DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2008
- Governor's Office v. Office of Open Records, Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- In Re Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2006
- In Re Condemnation of Lands Situate and Being in the City of ScrantonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- In re Condemnation by the Redevelopment Authority of Lancaster of Real EstateCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.