In Re De Facto Condemnation & Taking of Lands of WBF Associates
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part
CONCURRING AND DISSENTING OPINION
Justice SAYLOR.
I agree with the majority’s legal conclusion in Part I of its opinion that delay compensation should be due in favor of WBF Associates, but I would offer different reasons in support of this decision and believe that the availability of delay damages should be ultimately contingent upon jury findings in the de novo appeal; I respectfully differ with majority’s holding concerning the allowance of mortgage interest as a separate component of damages above and apart from delay compensation; and I would affirm the Commonwealth Court’s holding on the…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Phillips v. Washington Legal FoundationSupreme Court of the United States · 1998
- Danforth v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Jacobs v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Westgate, Ltd. v. StateTexas Supreme Court · 1992
- City of Buffalo v. J. W. Clement Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1971
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.