Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

MOUNT LEBANON TOWNSHIP APPEAL (06/24/52)

June 24, 1952

MOUNT LEBANON TOWNSHIP APPEAL


Appeal, No. 136, march T., 1952, from order of Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County, July T., 1950, No. 334, in Appeal of A.N. "Ab" Young Company, etc. Order affirmed.

COUNSEL

Samuel A. Schreiner, Township Solicitor, for appellant.

John B. Nicklas, Jr., with him E. B. Wolfe, Willard F. Agnew and McCrady & Nicklas, for appellee.

Before Drew, C.j., Stern, Stearne, Jones, Bell and Chidsey, JJ.

Author: Chidsey

[ 371 Pa. Page 275]

OPINION BY MR. JUSTICE CHIDSEY

This is a zoning case. It involves neither a variance nor an exception but merely the interpretation of a zoning ordinance. The appeal is by the Township of Mt. Lebanon from a final order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. This final order by the court en banc reversed the order of the trial judge,

[ 371 Pa. Page 276]

    allowed an appeal from the zoning board of adjustment and directed that zoning permit be issued to the appellee.

The application of the A.N. "AB" Young Company (hereinafter called Young Company) made on February 13, 1950, requested that a permit be issued to it for a one-story office and storeroom building, to be erected as an addition to its existing office building, on two lots known as lots numbers 10 and 11.*fn1 On May 24, 1926 the zoning ordinance in question was enacted by the appellant township. This ordinance in the section which is the center of this controversy provided as follows: "Section 11. Industrial and Manufacturing District. (District U-4). This district shall include only the property now owned by the South Hills Ice Company and the Duquesne Light Company fronting on Cochran Road and Carnegie Avenue and such extensions of said industries as may be made adjacent to and contiguous to said existing buildings. In this district the land may be used and buildings may be erected, altered or used for purposes or kindred purposes only as those for which it is used at the time of the passage of this ordinance, and for the uses permitted in Districts U-1, U-2, and U-3."

It is undisputed that the Duquesne Light Company was the record owner of lots 13 and 14 previous to the enactment of the zoning ordinance. The testimony also shows that a representative of the Duquesne Light Company, George Schlarb, purchased the adjacent and adjoining lots 10, 11 and 12 by an agreement of sale reduced to writing and dated June 1, 1926; that such purchase was for the Duquesne Light Company and his deed to the Duquesne Light Company was dated June

[ 371 Pa. Page 27710]

, 1926 and recorded August 5, 1926. However, the record also indicates that the Duquesne Light Company by check dated May 15, 1926 (i.e. prior to the enactment of the zoning ordinance) paid $500 down money for the purchase of lots 10, 11 and 12. The appellee Young Company is the present owner of lots 10 and 11. Title to lot 10 was acquired by it by a deed from Duquesne Light Company dated May 3, 1939. Title to lot 11 was acquired by a deed ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.