Opinion

Clawson v. Harborcreek Zoning Hearing Board

  • 9 Pa. Commw. 124
  • 304 A.2d 184
  • 1973 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 596
Court
Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
Filed
May 3, 1973
Status
Published
Author
Mencer
On the bench
Blatt, Bowman, Crumlish, Kramer, Mencer, Rogers, Wilkinson
Cited by
19 cases

court examined adjacent area, as well as two miles surrounding area

How later courts described this case

  • court examined adjacent area, as well as two miles surrounding area
  • which involved a township supervisor

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

Dissenting Opinion by

Judge Mencer:

. I respectfully dissent. I take no issue with the majority concerning the legal authority cited on the subject of spot zoning. Further, I admit that the appli *132 cation of the law to the facts of each individual case dealing with spot zoning is a difficult task and easily susceptible to differences of opinion. However, my reading of the record in this case convinces me that the rezoning of Supervisor’s Whitby’s lot did constitute spot zoning. I would reverse the order of the lower court.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.