# McKnight Shopping Center, Inc. v. Board of Property Assessment

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · February 25, 1965 · 417 Pa. 234

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6258644

## Case

- **Full name:** McKnight Shopping Center, Inc. v. Board of Property Assessment
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** February 25, 1965
- **Citations:** 417 Pa. 234; 209 A.2d 389; 1965 Pa. LEXIS 405
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Bell
- **Judges:** Bell, Brien, Cohen, Eagen, Jones, Musmanno
- **Cited by:** 112 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/6258644

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that a taxpayer may offer “evidence of assessments of comparable properties, so long as the taxpayer also presents evidence to show that the actual fair market value of the comparable properties is different than that found by the taxing authority” (citations omitted)
- finding error in court’s rejection of equalization evidence on grounds that the “comparable” properties were not similar enough to taxpayer’s property; any relevant evidence may be used to establish lack of uniformity in assessments
- stating that properties need not be identical to be comparable and comparisons may be based, among other things, on sales according to similarities in use, size, and type of construction
- noting that the proper assessment procedure is to value the property as a whole; however, separate values may be required for portions of the property
- noting that under the Pennsylvania Constitution, “it is clear that all real estate is the class entitled to uniform treatment” (emphasis in original)

## Opinion text

Dissenting Opinion by
Me. Chief Justice Bell:
I would affirm the Order of the Court below for the reasons set forth at length in my dissenting opinions in Morris v. Bd. of Property Assessment, 417 Pa. 192 , 209 A. 2d 407 , and in Deitch Company v. Bd. of Property Assessment, 417 Pa. 213 , 209 A. 2d 397 .
Mr. Justice Musmanno joins in this Dissenting Opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6258644. Public record. Not legal advice.