Legal Opinion · Dissent

Weidner v. Redevelopment Authority

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided August 17, 1977No. 507Published

1Dissent

ROBERTS, Justice.

I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissenting opinions in Scavo v. Commonwealth, Department of Highways, 439 Pa. 233, 240, 266 A.2d 759, 763 (1970) (Dissenting Opinion of Roberts, J., joined by Bell, C. J.), and Community Housing Services, Inc. v. Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment Authority, 435 Pa. 344, 350, 253 A.2d 260, 262 (1969) (Opinion of Roberts, J., joined by Bell, C. J.). I adhere to the position that “[t]he reasons which disable a condemnor from putting in evidence of purchases it has made in settlement of condemnation suits have no application to a landowner who…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Scavo v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
  2. Donald S. Nash and Sylvia K. Nash v. D.C. Redevelopment Land Agency, D.C. Redevelopment Land Agency v. Donald S. Nash and Sylvia K. NashCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
  3. Community Housing Services, Inc. v. Pittsburgh Urban Redevelopment AuthoritySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  4. COMMUNITY HS v. Pgh. Urban Red. Auth.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969

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

Powered by the Exa API