# Lennox v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

> Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · July 14, 1982 · 67 Pa. Commw. 417

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6368372

## Case

- **Full name:** James and Vilma Lennox v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh
- **Court:** Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 14, 1982
- **Citations:** 67 Pa. Commw. 417; 447 A.2d 1049; 1982 Pa. Commw. LEXIS 1397
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Williams
- **Judges:** Crumlish, MacPhail, Williams
- **Cited by:** 9 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/6368372

## Opinion text

Dissenting Opinion by Judge
Williams, Jr. :
I must respectfully dissent. Although I .support the reluctance of the majority to extend this litigation, I am compelled to disagree with the contention that we can resolve a question not addressed by either lower tribunal. Specifically because the .theory and fact of a vested right claim differ from that of a prior non-conforming use action, and because the property owner’s burden of proof is different in each action, I opine that a legal issue first decided by this Court must perforce be based on latent findings of fact. Such factual resolutions, however inferential, are beyond our scope of review. I would remand to the lower court and direct it to come to a reviewable conclusion on the vested right question.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6368372. Public record. Not legal advice.