Legal Opinion

Cox v. New Sewickley Township

Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 16, 1971No. Appeals, 73 C.D. 1971 and 74 C.D. 1971PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Judge Wilkinson,

The appellants in these two cases challenge the constitutionality of the provisions of the New Sewickley Township Junk Dealer and Junk Yard Ordinance of 1968. The Board of Supervisors passed this ordinance under the authority of Article VII, Section 702, Clause LVIII of the Second Class Township Code, Act of May 1, 1933, P. L. 103, as amended, 53 P.S. §65758. Immediately following its enactment on June 13, 1968, effective June 18, 1968, these actions were instituted to enjoin its enforcement. After a hearing, a preliminary injunction issued. A full hearing was held…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Bilbar Construction Co. v. Easttown Township Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  2. Best v. Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
  3. Murphy, Inc. v. Town of WestportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
  4. MASTRANGELO v. BUCKLEYSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
  5. William Laubach & Sons v. EastonSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1943

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

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Kadash v. City of WilliamsportCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Orwell Township Supervisors v. JewettCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1990
  3. Rockdale County v. Mitchell's Used Auto Parts, Inc.Supreme Court of Georgia · 1979
  4. Mt. Joy Township v. Davies Used Auto PartsCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  5. Talley v. CommonwealthCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1989

5 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