Sultanik v. Board of Supervisors
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion by
Judge Craig,
This zoning appeal involves claims that a zoning ordinance unlawfully excludes twin-home residences and shopping centers. Initially, however, the case presents a question of due process in curative amendment proceedings:
In view of the rule which invalidates a local zoning board decision when the functions of the municipality’s adversary counsel and adjudicative counsel are commingled in the person of one attorney, is a local curative amendment decision also invalid when such adversary and adjudicative attorneys are different individuals but from the same law firm,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Casey v. ZONING HEAR. BD. OF WARWICK TP.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Horn v. Township of HilltownSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Ellick v. Bd. of Spvrs., Worcester Twp.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1975
- Gardner v. RepaskySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1969
- Hopewell Township Board of Supervisors v. GollaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1982
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- C & M Developers, Inc. v. Bedminster Township Zoning Hearing BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- Montgomery Crossing Associates v. Township of Lower GwyneddCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2000
- In re the Bartkowski Investment Group, Inc.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2014
- Bethlehem Mines Corp. v. Workmen's Compensation Appeal BoardCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1986
- Newtown Township Board of Supervisors v. Greater Media Radio Co.Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1991
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.