Tidewater Oil Co. v. POORE
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Mr. Justice Musmanno,
Viewed from an airplane in midflight, a “tank farm” looks like a field dotted with neat, dignified mushrooms. Visited on the ground, however, a tank farm looks exactly like what it is — a succession of mastodonic, metallic tanks filled with liquids and gases of an inflammable and explosive character. The tanks under consideration in this case, 9 to 40 in number, were designed to measure from 40 to 48 feet in height, 70 to 120 feet in diameter, and calculated to hold from 1,334,000 to 4,032,000 gallons of gasoline and petroleum products, each. It would not take…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Bilbar Construction Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Jennings' AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1938
- Pincus v. PowerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1954
- GRATTON v. CONTESupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
- Lindquist AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1950
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Valley View Civic Ass'n v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1983
- National Land & Investment Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1965
- Concord Township AppealSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1970
- Fidler v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1962
- Anstine v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1963
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.