# City of Philadelphia v. Delaware County Board of Assessment Appeals

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · February 28, 1997 · 691 A.2d 992

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953831

## Case

- **Full name:** CITY OF PHILADELPHIA v. DELAWARE COUNTY BOARD OF ASSESSMENT APPEALS Interboro School District
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** February 28, 1997
- **Citations:** 691 A.2d 992; 1997 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 96
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by McGinley
- **Judges:** Flaherty, McGinley, Mirarchi
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953831

## Opinion text

McGINLEY, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent to the majority’s conclusion that the USPS budding is not a self-sustained “general service” budding subject to taxation under Paragraph 8 of the Agreement.
As the majority notes Paragraph 8 of the Agreement provides:
It is agreed by ad parties hereto that if such a significant portion of a general service budding ... shad be leased to tenants for commercial purposes so as to make that budding at lease self-sustained to the City considering ad operating and debt service costs, then such budding shad be taxable by the Delaware County Authorities signatory hereto....
Unlike the majority, I bedeve the terms of this paragraph are clear and unambiguous. Simply stated, Paragraph 8 provides that where significant portions of a general service budding are leased and the rents derived therefrom are sufficient to make the budding self-sufficient, i.e. no City funds are necessary to maintain the budding, the budding is taxable.
Here, the record reveals that USPS pays the City annual rents for the budding ranging from $1,118,948.00 to $1,611,285.00. In addition, there is no evidence in the record which would support a conclusion that the City expends funds to maintain the budding. Ergo, I believe that the USPS budding is a self-sustaining general service budding subject to tax under Paragraph 8 of the Agreement.
Accordingly, I would reverse the trial court’s grant of summary judgment.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4953831. Public record. Not legal advice.