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, 953 A.2d 855 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008).
Date of Decision: 7/9/08
Appellate Procedure
Harman v. Forest County Conservation District and Planning Board, Pa. Commw. (2008)
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., 950 A.2d 1117 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008).
Date of Decision: 6/11/08
McDonald v. Redevelopment Authority of Allegheny County, Pa. Commw. (2008)
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, 952 A.2d 713 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008)
Date of Decision: 6/6/08
Therres v. Zoning Hearing Board of the Borough of Rose Valley, Pa. Commw. (2008)
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, 947 A.2d 226 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2008).
Date of Decision: 4/4/08
In re: Condemnation by the Economy Borough Municipal Authority, Pa. Commw. (2007)
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, (Pa. Cmwlth. 2007).
Yarmey v. ZHB of Forty Fort Borough (2000)
A party whose land use appeal has been found by the trial court to be frivolous and who fails to post the required bond but rather appeals the earlier denial by the court and then loses that further appeal is required to pay to the other side the reasonable attorneys fees costs and expenses of defending that further appeal.
Yarmey v. Zoning Hearing Board of Forty Fort Borough., 745 A. 2d 1274, Pa. Comwlth, (2000).
BPG Real Estate Investors-Straw Party II, L.P. v. Bd. of Supervisors, Pa. Commw. (2010)
Settlement agreement cannot allow for development of property that was not the subject of the land use decision that was appealed.
BPG Real Estate Investors-Straw Party II, L.P. v. Bd. of Supervisors, 990 A.2d 140 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 2010).
Narberth Borough v. Lower Merion Township (2007)
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,
915 A.2d 626 (Pa. 2007).
Leoni v. Whitepain Township ZHB, Pa. Commw. (1998)
Leoni v. Whitepain Township Zoning Hearing Board, 709 A. 2d 999, Pa. Cmwlth (1998).
Note: Distinguished by Orie v. ZHB of the Borough of Beaver, 767 A.2d 623
Commonwealth v. Locust Township (2009)
Commonwealth Court has original jurisdiction for challenges filed by the Attorney General to township ordinances under the ACRE statute.
Commonwealth v. Locust Twp., 968 A.2d 1263 (Pa. 2009).