Legal Opinion · Dissent

Commonwealth v. DiMascio

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided December 4, 1986No. Appeal No. 11 E.D. Appeal Dkt. 1986Published

1DissentLarsen, Justice

I dissent to the majority’s per curiam affirmance of the Commonwealth Court.

The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, Department of Transportation (Penn DOT), appellee, was in the process of constructing a “Domar” building1 for the storage of road salt in the Township of Willistown when appellants, the Township and its building/zoning officer, served upon Penn DOT a cease and desist order intended to stop further work on the project until a building permit had been applied for and issued in accordance with local zoning ordinances. Penn DOT then filed a petition for review addressed to the original…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Moyer v. PHILLIPS, MDSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
  2. Snider v. ThornburghSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  3. Commonwealth v. Ogontz Area Neighbors Ass'nSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1984
  4. Carroll v. County of YorkSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Middletown Township v. Delaware County Institution DistrictSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1973

1 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