Legal Opinion · Dissent

Liverpool Township v. Stephens

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 19, 2006Published

1Dissent

DISSENTING OPINION BY

Judge PELLEGRINI.

I respectfully dissent. Not following the well-settled law of this Commonwealth, the majority finds that Liverpool Township (Township), a township of the second class, has no authority to regulate where sewage sludge is placed on property because it impermissibly interferes with “geological standards” set by administrative regulations of the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). I suggest that regulation has nothing to do with “geological standards” because it has nothing to do with “geology,” but has everything to do with “smell” —…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Franklin Township v. Commonwealth, Department of Environmental ResourcesSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  2. Franklin Tp. v. COM., DEPT. OF ENV. RESOURCESSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
  3. Duff v. Township of NorthamptonCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1987
  4. Municipality of Monroeville v. Chambers Development Corp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1985
  5. Greater Greensburg Sewage Authority v. Hempfield TownshipCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1972

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API