Naylor v. Township of Hellam
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1DissentNewman, Justice
Because I believe that the Municipalities Planning Code (MPC), Act of July 31, 1968, P.L. 805, as reenacted and amended, 53 P.S. §§ 10101-11202, does grant a municipality the power to enact a temporary moratorium on certain types of subdivision and land development while the municipality revises its zoning and subdivision land development ordinances, I respectfully dissent.
As the Majority points out, the stated purpose of the MPC is very broad. Section 105 defines the purpose of the act:
It is the intent, purpose and scope of this act to protect and promote safety, health and morals; to…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Miller v. Board of Public Works of Los AngelesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1925
- Golden v. Planning Board of RamapoNew York Court of Appeals · 1972
- Kline v. HarrisburgSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1949
- Monmouth Lumber Co. v. Township of OceanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
- Town of Lebanon v. WoodsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.