# In Re Appeal of M.A. Kravitz Co.

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · April 25, 1983 · 501 Pa. 200

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9757818

## Case

- **Full name:** In Re APPEAL OF M.A. KRAVITZ CO., INC. From Denial of Curative Amendment Application by the Board of Supervisors of Wrightstown Township. Appeal of BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF WRIGHTSTOWN TOWNSHIP
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** April 25, 1983
- **Citations:** 501 Pa. 200; 460 A.2d 1075; 1983 Pa. LEXIS 525
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Nix
- **Judges:** Zappala, Roberts, Nix, Larsen, Flaherty, McDermott, Hutchinson
- **Cited by:** 24 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/9757818

## Opinion text

NIX, Justice,
dissenting.
I dissent. I would affirm the order of the Commonwealth Court for the reasons set forth in its well analyzed opinion. See In Re: Appeal of M.A. Kravitz Co., Inc., 53 Pa. Commonwealth Ct. 622 , 419 A.2d 227 (1980). The relaxed judicial review of suburban zoning decisions reflected in the plurality’s view permits virtually unlimited freedom to developing municipalities to erect exclusionary walls on their boundaries, according to local whim, and to use the zoning power for aims far beyond its legitimate purposes.
LARSEN, J., joins in this dissenting opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9757818. Public record. Not legal advice.