Legal Opinion · Dissent

Chanceford Aviation Properties, L.L.P. v. Chanceford Township Board of Supervisors

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Decided May 31, 2007No. 79 MAP 2005Published

1DissentJustice Saylor

For the reasons stated by the majority, I agree with its holding that the Commonwealth Court erred in its indication that the Airport Zoning Act (“AZA”) is directory rather than mandatory. Nevertheless, I support the Commonwealth Court’s conclusion that Section 411 of the Chanceford Township Zoning Ordinance, in its general application, is sufficient to comply with the terms of the AZA. See Baublitz v. Chance*117ford Twp. Bd. of Supervisors, 865 A.2d 975, 978-79 (Pa. Cmwlth.2005). Since I believe, however, that there is an issue concerning Section 411’s applicability in the circumstances involved…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Werner v. ZazycznySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
  2. Township of Chartiers v. William H. Martin, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1988
  3. Limley v. Zoning Hearing BoardSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1993
  4. In Re Appeal of KreiderCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
  5. McGriff v. COM., BD. OF PROBATION & PAROLECommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2002

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