Bishop Co. Appeal

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Bishop Co. Appeal

158 A.2d 551, 398 Pa. 429, 1960 Pa. LEXIS 599

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 15, 1960

DocketAppeal, No. 58

StatusPublished

This text of 158 A.2d 551 (Bishop Co. Appeal) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bishop Co. Appeal, 158 A.2d 551, 398 Pa. 429, 1960 Pa. LEXIS 599 (Pa. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Curiam,

This is an appeal from an order of the court below sustaining the refusal of the board of adjustment of Sayre Borough of a building permit for an extension of a nonconforming business use of property located in an area zoned residential. By stipulation of counsel, the matter was heard by the court below on the record made before the board of adjustment upon the applicant’s appeal thereto from the zoning officer’s revocation of the permit which he had originally issued. Additional testimony was not taken by the court. No beneficial purpose can be served by reciting the facts adduced before the board of adjustment. We fully agree with the court below that the board of adjustment was not guilty of either a manifest abuse of discretion or of an error of law.

Order affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Opinion

Pee Curiam,

This is an appeal from an order of the court below sustaining the refusal of the board of adjustment of Sayre Borough of a building permit for an extension of a nonconforming business use of property located in an area zoned residential. By stipulation of counsel, the matter was heard by the court below on the record made before the board of adjustment upon the applicant’s appeal thereto from the zoning officer’s revocation of the permit which he had originally issued. Additional testimony was not taken by the court. No beneficial purpose can be served by reciting the facts adduced before the board of adjustment. We fully agree with the court below that the board of adjustment was not guilty of either a manifest abuse of discretion or of an error of law.

Order affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 A.2d 551, 398 Pa. 429, 1960 Pa. LEXIS 599, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bishop-co-appeal-pa-1960.