E. C. Schneider, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

389 Pa. 593
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided June 28, 1957·No. Appeal, No. 47·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Opinion

per Curiam,

This appeal involves the expansion of a nonconforming use. The principles governing the increase or extension or expansion of a nonconforming use are well settled. See Firth v. Scherzberg, 366 Pa. 443, 77 A. 2d 443; Humphreys v. Stuart Realty Corp., 364 Pa. 616, 73 A. 2d 407; Peirce Appeal, 384 Pa. 100, 119 A. 2d 506; Blanarik Appeal, 375 Pa. 209, 100 A. 2d 58; Gilfillan’s Permit, 291 Pa. 358, 140 A. 136.

We have examined the record and find no manifest abuse of discretion or error of law. The order of the Court below is affirmed on the opinion of Judge Lois Mary McBride, which is reported in 8 D. & C. 2d 539. Appellant to pay the costs.

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

E. C. Schneider, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment, 389 Pa. 593 (Pa. 1957).

389 Pa. 593 (E. C. Schneider, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jenkintown Towing Service v. Zoning Hearing Board
446 A.2d 716 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1982)
Appeal of Suburban General Hospital
410 A.2d 85 (Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania, 1980)
Barrett v. Tredyffrin Township Zoning Board of Adjustment
42 Pa. D. & C.2d 555 (Chester County Court of Common Pleas, 1967)
Eitnier v. EREITZ CORP.
172 A.2d 320 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1961)
Upper St. Clair Township Grange Zoning Case
152 A.2d 768 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1959)
Pittsburgh Outdoor Advertising Co. v. Clairton
133 A.2d 542 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1957)