Key Topic: Appellate Procedure

Cases are listed below in alphabetical order:
*Click on case name to review case summary.

• A person who is not a party to an action may appeal a zoning board decision if they have a legally enforceable interest that is not adequately represented
  

  Atticks v. Lancaster Township Zoning Hearing Board (2007)

• Settlement negotiations on an appeal from the ZHB must include the ZHB
  

  Becker v. Sewickley Borough Zoning Hearing Board (2005)

• Governing board lacks standing to appeal when its inaction results in a deemed approval of an application
  

  Board of Supervisors of East Rockhill Twp. v. Mager (2004)

• Objectors are not required to be notified of land use appeals
  

  Boerner v. Hazle Township ZHB (2004)

• The standard of review for appellate courts
  

  Borough of Jenkintown v. Board of Commissioners of Abington Twp. (2004)

• Standing of a municipality to appeal
  

  Brendel v. Zoning Enforcement Officer of the Borough of Ridgeway (2001)

• The Attorney General had standing to bring an action, at the request of a citizen, in original jurisdiction in the Commonwealth Court against the Township for an alleged “unauthorized local ordinance” under the Agricultural, Communities and Rural Environment Act (“Act 38”). The Court found that Act 38 was constitutional; however, the Court denied summary relief because it was unclear whether the application of sewage sludge was a normal agricultural operation.
  

  Commonwealth v. East Brunswick Township (2008)

• If adjoining lots are under common ownership when a zoning ordinance is passed that renders them undersized, then the lots are presumed to have merged and the burden is on the landowner to rebut that presumption
  

  Cottone v. ZHB of Polk Township (2008)

• Court of Common Pleas did not abuse discretion in requiring bond under Section 1003-A of the MPC for frivolous appeal
  

  D. Kasun Associates v. Manheim Twp. Board of Commissioners (2005)

• A decision by a Subdivision Administrator, as agent of the Planning Board, constituted a final decision and was appealable to the court of common pleas
  

  Harman v. Forest County Conservation District and Planning Bd. (2008)

• Evidence necessary at enforcement notice appeal
  

  Hartner v. ZHB of Upper St. Clair Twp. (2004)

• A plaintiff may seek review of an interlocutory order granting preliminary objections but providing the ability to file an amended pleading, by waiting until the time period for amendment expires and petitioning the lower court for an order dismissing the complaint
  

  Hionis v. Concord Township (2009)

• A court of common pleas errs in a land use appeal when, without taking additional evidence, it makes its own findings of fact and conclusions of law
  

  In re: Appeal of Thompson (2006)

• The compensation for a taking should be determined by a board of viewer, not raised in preliminary objections
  

  In Re: The Condemnation by the County of Allegheny (2004)

• In eminent domain cases, a party may not appeal as a matter of right from a non-final order overruling that party’s preliminary objections to the opponent’s preliminary objections
  

  In re: Condemnation by the Economy Borough Municipal Authority (2007)

• Persons who may appeal the grant of a variance
  

  Leoni v. Whitepain Twp. ZHB (1998)

• An amendment to a statue of limitations was applicable because a statute relating to procedural matters is applicable to cases filed after the effective date of the statute
  

  McDonald v. Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County (2008)

• A party not directly involved in a land use action may intervene only as set forth in the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure
  

  McLoughlin v. ZHB of Newtown Township (2008)

• A thirty-day appeal period for land use decisions runs from the mailing of a municipality’s written decision, not from a verbal announcement of the decision
  

  Narberth Borough v. Lower Merion Township (2007)

• Persons who may appeal the grant of a variance
  

  Orie v. ZHB of the Borough of Beaver (2001)

• Notice of a hearing was not properly served when it was not sent to the attorney of record
  

  Panzone v. Fayette County ZHB (2008)

• Notice requirements for building permits
  

  Rabenold v. ZHB of the Borough of Palmerton (2001)

• The capricious disregard standard of review applies to the review of zoning hearing board decisions
  

  Taliaferro v. Darby Township Zoning Hearing Board (2005)

• The capricious disregard standard of review applies to the review of zoning hearing board decisions
  

  Taliaferro v. Darby Township Zoning Hearing Board (2005)

• A notice of appeal was quashed for failing to set forth the basis for the appeal
  

  Therres v. Zoning Hearing Board of the Borough of Rose Valley (2008)

• Public notice requirements of MPC are mandatory
  

  Valianatos v. ZHB of Richmond Twp. (2001)

• A party who files a frivolous suit must pay the other parties attorneys fees, even on appeal
  

  Yarmey v. ZHB of Forty Fort Borough (2000)

DISCLAIMER:
This site is designed to provide summary review of selected Pennsylvania and Federal Court decisions related to land use and land use controls. The information contained herein, although produced by professionals, is not intended to render any legal service. Nor should the materials herein be utilized as a substitute for professional services. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the service of an attorney or other professional should be sought. DCED makes no representations, warranties or guarantees as to the accuracy, completeness or suitability of the information provided herein.

Back to Top