Meyers v. Board of Adjustment

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

Meyers v. Board of Adjustment

188 A.2d 730, 410 Pa. 201, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 588

CourtSupreme Court of Pennsylvania

DecidedMarch 19, 1963

DocketAppeal, No. 66

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 188 A.2d 730 (Meyers v. Board of Adjustment) 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

Meyers v. Board of Adjustment, 188 A.2d 730, 410 Pa. 201, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 588 (Pa. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell,

[202]*202The Zoning Board of Adjustment granted appellants a permit to erect a residence for nse as a sample house, and also to erect a garagé. Appellants spent $19,000 to erect the sample house, but improperly used the garage as an office for the conduct of their general business rather than for a garage. Eighteen months thereafter, the Board of Adjustment revoked the permit for the sample house and for the garage, such revocation to take effect six months thereafter. The lower Court, without taking testimony, affirmed the decision and Order of the Zoning Board. Appellants concede that the use of the garage for office purposes was improper and that this part of the Order requiring them to desist was proper. However, with respect to revocation of the permit for the sample house and its use, appellants had a vested interest in this house and were guilty of no conduct which justified a revocation of the permit and a nullification of their interests: Shapiro v. Zoning Board, 377 Pa. 621, 105 A. 2d 299; Lower Merion Township v. Frankel, 358 Pa. 430, 433, 57 A. 2d 900; Herskovits v. Irwin, 299 Pa. 155, 160, 149 A. 195.

The Order of the lower Court is affirmed with respect to appellants’ use of the garage; the Order of the lower Court affirming the revocation by the Zoning Board of Adjustment of appellants’ permit for and use of the dwelling as a sample house is reversed.

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

Opinion by

Mr. Chief Justice Bell,

[202]*202The Zoning Board of Adjustment granted appellants a permit to erect a residence for nse as a sample house, and also to erect a garagé. Appellants spent $19,000 to erect the sample house, but improperly used the garage as an office for the conduct of their general business rather than for a garage. Eighteen months thereafter, the Board of Adjustment revoked the permit for the sample house and for the garage, such revocation to take effect six months thereafter. The lower Court, without taking testimony, affirmed the decision and Order of the Zoning Board. Appellants concede that the use of the garage for office purposes was improper and that this part of the Order requiring them to desist was proper. However, with respect to revocation of the permit for the sample house and its use, appellants had a vested interest in this house and were guilty of no conduct which justified a revocation of the permit and a nullification of their interests: Shapiro v. Zoning Board, 377 Pa. 621, 105 A. 2d 299; Lower Merion Township v. Frankel, 358 Pa. 430, 433, 57 A. 2d 900; Herskovits v. Irwin, 299 Pa. 155, 160, 149 A. 195.

The Order of the lower Court is affirmed with respect to appellants’ use of the garage; the Order of the lower Court affirming the revocation by the Zoning Board of Adjustment of appellants’ permit for and use of the dwelling as a sample house is reversed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

188 A.2d 730, 410 Pa. 201, 1963 Pa. LEXIS 588, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/meyers-v-board-of-adjustment-pa-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack