# Metropolitan Pittsburgh Nonprofit Housing Corp. v. Board of Property Assessment, Appeals & Review

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · October 5, 1978 · 480 Pa. 622

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9700964

## Case

- **Full name:** METROPOLITAN PITTSBURGH NONPROFIT HOUSING CORPORATION, Appellant, v. BOARD OF PROPERTY ASSESSMENT, APPEALS AND REVIEW
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** October 5, 1978
- **Citations:** 480 Pa. 622; 391 A.2d 1059; 1978 Pa. LEXIS 1065
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Roberts
- **Judges:** Eagen, O'Brien, Roberts, Pomeroy, Nix, Manderino, Packel
- **Cited by:** 12 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/9700964

## Opinion text

ROBERTS, Justice,
dissenting.
Metropolitan Pittsburgh Nonprofit Housing Corporation provides housing for low and moderate income families at less than market rents. Metropolitan is eligible for federal support under Section 221(d)(3) of the National Housing Act. *631 The majority holds that because Metropolitan evicts tenants who cannot pay their rent and because a federal program to some degree reimburses local property taxes, Metropolitan Pittsburgh Housing Corporation is not a charity and is not eligible for tax exempt status under the relevant provisions of the Pennsylvania Constitution and statutes. I dissent.
Other institutions, such as schools and hospitals, which are exempt from the tax in question, and which are in large part subsidized by government funds, do not make available their services to those who cannot pay a fee. Thus, I do not find the eviction of tenants controlling on the question of whether Metropolitan is eligible for tax relief.
The majority also asserts that since Congress has provided some measure of reimbursement for Metropolitan’s tax liability, Metropolitan should not be granted status as a tax exempt charity under Pennsylvania statutes. I cannot support the view that we should determine whether Metropolitan is a charity under the laws of Pennsylvania by looking to specific provisions of federal legislation.
In Presbyterian Homes Tax Exemption Case, 428 Pa. 145, 150 , 236 A.2d 776, 778-79 (1968) we held:
“The word ‘charitable’, in a legal sense, includes every gift for a general public use, to be applied, consistent with existing laws, for the benefit of an indefinite number of persons, and designed to benefit them from an educational, religious, moral, physical or social standpoint. In its broadest meaning it is understood ‘to refer to something done or given for the benefit of our fellows or the public’: Taylor v. Hoag, 273 Pa. 194, 196 , 116 A. 826 . ‘Charitable uses may be unlimited in number and are not to be determined by the application of any narrow criterion. Whether a purpose is charitable must be ascertained from a consideration of all surrounding circumstances. A design to achieve objects beneficial to the community is common to all charitable purposes.’ ”
Metropolitan’s purposes and structure fall squarely within this characterization of a charity and therefore I would reverse the order of the Commonwealth Court.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9700964. Public record. Not legal advice.