PENNSBURY VILLAGE ASSOCIATES, LLC v. McIntyre

966 A.2d 547, 600 Pa. 369, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 201
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania·Decided January 29, 2009·No. 410 MAL 2008·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

*370 ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 29th day of January 2009, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED. The issues, as framed by Petitioner, are:

1. Did the Commonwealth Court ruling render settlement contracts resolving land use disputes which arguably relate to an environmental law or regulation unenforceable and deprive citizens of the right to resolve their disputes via settlement agreements?
2. Did the Commonwealth Court err in applying and analyzing the Environmental Immunity Act in the instant matter in which the purposes of the Act were not implicated?
3. Did the Commonwealth Court misapply the Environmental Immunity Act by holding that a deed restriction is an environmental law or regulation?
4. Did the Commonwealth Court err in applying and analyzing the Environmental Immunity Act by holding that the business relationship exception to the Act did not apply to this case?

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

PENNSBURY VILLAGE ASSOCIATES, LLC v. McIntyre, 966 A.2d 547, 600 Pa. 369, 2009 Pa. LEXIS 201 (Pa. 2009).

966 A.2d 547 (PENNSBURY VILLAGE ASSOCIATES, LLC v. McIntyre) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pennsbury Village Associates, LLC v. McIntyre
11 A.3d 906 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 2011)