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.

ANTHONY J. LARRECQ AND LOWER MAKEFIELD TOWNSHIP CIVIC ASSOCIATION v. FREDERICK VAN ORDEN (11/14/75)

decided: November 14, 1975.

ANTHONY J. LARRECQ AND LOWER MAKEFIELD TOWNSHIP CIVIC ASSOCIATION
v.
FREDERICK VAN ORDEN, RICHARD HOYT, LLOYD KLATZKIN, HENRY MILLER, WESLEY HACKMAN AND TOWNSHIP OF LOWER MAKEFIELD. ANTHONY J. LARRECQ AND LOWER MAKEFIELD TOWNSHIP CIVIC ASSOCIATION, APPELLANTS



Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County in case of Anthony J. Larrecq, Lower Makefield Township Civic Association v. Frederick Van Orden, Richard Hoyt, Lloyd Klatzkin, Henry Miller, Wesley Hackman and Township of Lower Makefield, No. 75-4993-03-5.

COUNSEL

T. Sidney Cadwallader, II, with him E. Dillwyn Darlington, and Cadwallader, Darlington & Clarke, for appellants.

George T. Kelton, with him William J. Carlin, and Begley, Carlin, Mandio, Kelton & Popkin, for appellees.

President Judge Bowman and Judges Crumlish, Jr., Kramer, Wilkinson, Jr., Mencer and Rogers. Judge Blatt did not participate. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.

Author: Crumlish

[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 625]

This is an appeal by plaintiffs Larrecq and Lower Makefield Township Civic Association (Appellants) from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County in which it sustained the preliminary objections of the defendants Van Orden, et al, and Lower Makefield Township (Township) and dismissed Appellants' amended complaint with prejudice.

Appellants brought an action in equity against the individual defendants as Supervisors of Lower Makefield Township and the Township itself seeking to enjoin the construction of an expansion to the Township building and the sale of a proposed bond issue for the financing thereof. Appellants also sought to compel the consideration of alternate plans and feasibility studies. The Township filed preliminary objections in the nature of a demurrer to the complaint and also filed a motion for expedited argument and decision on preliminary objections. In its motion, the Township stressed the serious effect which the court's resolution of the case would have upon its construction and financing programs.

A three-judge panel of the court below sustained Township's demurrer, leave being granted Appellants to file an amended complaint. It is also important to note that the order provided that if the amended complaint was filed on or before 4:00 P.M., June 5 and preliminary objections were filed prior to 1:00 P.M., June 6, 1975, argument would be heard at 1:00 P.M. June 6, 1975.

Appellants filed an amended complaint to which the Township again demurred. The court below sustained

[ 21 Pa. Commw. Page 626]

Townships' demurrer and dismissed Appellants' amended complaint with prejudice.

Hence this appeal, which we find to be without merit.

At the outset, we note that our review must follow the well-settled principle that in considering a demurrer appeal, we must accept as true every well-pleaded and relevant fact in plaintiff's complaint. Line Lexington Lumber & Millwork Co. v. Pennsylvania Publishing Co., 451 Pa. 154, 301 A.2d 684 (1973); Rankin v. ...


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.