The Pennsylvania Supreme Court reviewed an eminent domain and land use appeal from the Commonwealth Court in PBS Coals, Inc. v. Commw. of PA Dep’t of Trans. The condemnees in this action owned and leased the rights to mine coal beneath the surface of a particular lot. PennDOT took adjoining land to construct a highway … Read more
In Caruso-Long v. Reccek, the next-door neighbors were embroiled in a bitter trespass and nuisance suit over a tree. The tree was on one neighbor’s property, but its branches and roots were growing onto the other neighbor’s property. Clearly, the only way to solve this issue was in the courts. Given the slow speed at … Read more
In 41 E. Palisade Ave Real Estate v. City of Englewood, the 3rd Circuit assessed the providence of the District Court’s order granting a preliminary injunction in favor of the developer of an assisted-living facility. The developer sought to build its facility in an area of town zoned for single-family homes, though the zoning code … Read more
In In re Consolidated Appeals of Chester-Upland Sch. Dist., the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the value generated by a billboard on private property affects the valuation of that property in a tax assessment.
In Pineda v. Perry, the Superior Court held that a party may appeal directly from the grant of a permanent injunction, even when judgment has not been entered. The Court then reviewed a dispute over an easement that was granted as part of a recorded subdivision. The Court held the easement remained and could only … Read more
The Superior Court addressed standing in the context of a foreclosure action in MB Fin. Bank v. Rao. More specifically, the Court considered whether the plaintiff sufficiently proved that it owned a Lost Note Affidavit. The Court found that the pleadings and evidence at trial did establish the plaintiff’s ownership of the affidavit and thus … Read more
In Catanzaro v. Pennell, the Superior Court reiterated the pleading standard necessary to succeed on a action to quiet title. The Court ruled that the plaintiff failed to adequately plead her case because she failed to assert that she and the defendant had a competing claim to title in the disputed real estate.
In Johnson v. Phelan Hallinan & Schmieg, LLP, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the 2008 amendments to the Pennsylvania Loan Interest & Protection Law — which govern residential mortgages — do not apply retroactively to mortgages executed before the amendments took effect.
The Appellate Division ruled in State v. St. Mary’s Church Gloucester that the Eminent Domain Act of 1971 repealed a portion of N.J.S.A. 27:7-22. The latter statute had required the Commissioner of Transportation, upon taking property in eminent domain, to pay 6 percent interest on the judgment not previously held in ESCROW. However, the Eminent … Read more
In Guiser v. Seiber the Superior Court quashed the appeal, in part, because the appellant did not wait for the trial court to rule on post-sentence motions and enter judgment. But the Court reviewed an order granting injuctive relief because a party has a right to appeal immediately from such relief. The Court held that the trial … Read more