Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Pennsylvania opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2018 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Pennsylvania courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Payne v. Kassabgreen2 sentences2017See generally Payne v. Kassab, 468 Pa. 226 , 361 A.2d 263, 268 (1976) (land dedicated in public trust may not be diverted by governmental officials to private use); Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 123-24 (the local government “holds, subject to the trusts, in favor of the community, and is but the conservator of the title in the soil, and has neither power nor authority to sell and convey the same for private purposes.”). 2017See generally Payne v. Kassab, 468 Pa. 226 , 361 A.2d 263, 268 (1976) (land dedicated in public trust may not be diverted by governmental officials to private use); Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 123-24 (the local government “holds, subject to the trusts, in favor of the community, and is but the conservator of the title in the soil, and has neither power nor authority to sell and convey the same for private purposes.”). | 2 | 2 |
Trustees of the Philadelphia Museums v. Trustees of the Universitygreen2 sentences2017See generally Payne v. Kassab, 468 Pa. 226 , 361 A.2d 263, 268 (1976) (land dedicated in public trust may not be diverted by governmental officials to private use); Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 123-24 (the local government “holds, subject to the trusts, in favor of the community, and is but the conservator of the title in the soil, and has neither power nor authority to sell and convey the same for private purposes.”). 2017Although the DDPA does not expressly define what constitutes a “dedication” of property to public use—triggering the requirement of orphans’ court approval for its disposition—we noted in Erie Golf Course that, under our prior decisions involving the common law public trust doctrine, a property is “dedicated” to public use by a municipality whenever the municipality has both committed the property to public use and the public has accepted it for such use. 992 A.2d at 85 n.14; Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 125 ; see also Appeal of Leech, 371 Pa. 84 , 89 A.2d 351, 353 (1952) (“A municipality’s | 2 | 2 |
Dormont Borough Appealgreen2 sentences2017Although the DDPA does not expressly define what constitutes a “dedication” of property to public use—triggering the requirement of orphans’ court approval for its disposition—we noted in Erie Golf Course that, under our prior decisions involving the common law public trust doctrine, a property is “dedicated” to public use by a municipality whenever the municipality has both committed the property to public use and the public has accepted it for such use. 992 A.2d at 85 n.14; Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 125 ; see also Appeal of Leech, 371 Pa. 84 , 89 A.2d 351, 353 (1952) (“A municipality’s 2017Although the DDPA does not expressly define what constitutes a “dedication” of property to public use—triggering the requirement of orphans’ court approval for its disposition—we noted in Erie Golf Course that, under our prior decisions involving the common law public trust doctrine, a property is “dedicated” to public use by a municipality whenever the municipality has both committed the property to public use and the public has accepted it for such use. 992 A.2d at 85 n.14; Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 125 ; see also Appeal of Leech, 371 Pa. 84 , 89 A.2d 351, 353 (1952) (“A municipality’s | 1 | 1 |
Koter v. Cosgrovegreen1 sentence2017The articulation of the mootness doctrine . . . was acknowledged in our 5 “Equity has established the doctrine of laches to preclude actions that are brought without due diligence and which result in prejudice to the non-moving party.” Koter v. Cosgrove, 844 A.2d 29, 34 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2004). 6 As this Court explained, ‘[u]nder the common law public trust doctrine, when land has been dedicated and accepted for public use, a political subdivision is estopped from interfering with or revoking the grant at least so long as the land continues to be used, in good faith, for the purpose for which it wa | 1 | 1 |
Easton v. Kochgreen2 sentences2017Section 3383’s restriction of a municipality’s power to unilaterally change the purpose for which property has been dedicated to the public trust is a codification of a bedrock tenet of the common law public trust doctrine, which is that “[a] municipality cannot revoke or destroy, after dedication and acceptance, the right of the public to the exclusive use of the property for the purpose designated.” City of Easton v. *726 Koch, 152 Pa.Super. 327 , 31 A.2d 747, 752 (1943). 2017Section 3383’s restriction of a municipality’s power to unilaterally change the purpose for which property has been dedicated to the public trust is a codification of a bedrock tenet of the common law public trust doctrine, which is that “[a] municipality cannot revoke or destroy, after dedication and acceptance, the right of the public to the exclusive use of the property for the purpose designated.” City of Easton v. *726 Koch, 152 Pa.Super. 327 , 31 A.2d 747, 752 (1943). | 1 | 1 |
Pilchesky v. Rendellgreen1 sentence2012As this Court explained in Pilchesky v. Rendell, 932 A.2d 287, 290-91 (Pa.Cmwlth.2007): [T]he respondents are correct that the common law public trust doctrine does not apply in light of the legislative enactments concerning the Complex. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Pennsylvania. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In Re Estate of Ryerss
green
2 sentences2018(Reproduced Record (R.R.) at 1a.) "Under the common law public trust doctrine, when land has been dedicated and accepted for public use, a political subdivision is estopped from interfering with or revoking the grant at least so long as the land continues to be used, in good faith, for the purpose for which it was originally dedicated." In re Estate of Ryerss , 987 A.2d 1231 , 1237 n.8 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (citation omitted). 2017Pursuant to the common law public trust doctrine: "[W]hen land has been dedicated and accepted for public use, a political subdivision is estopped from interfering with or revoking the grant at least so long as the land continues to be used, in good faith, for the purpose for which it was originally dedicated.” In re Estate of Ryerss, 987 A.2d 1231 , 1237 n.8 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (citation omitted). 7 . | 6 | 2012–2018 |
In Re Erie Golf Course
green
2 sentences2017Although the DDPA does not expressly define what constitutes a “dedication” of property to public use—triggering the requirement of orphans’ court approval for its disposition—we noted in Erie Golf Course that, under our prior decisions involving the common law public trust doctrine, a property is “dedicated” to public use by a municipality whenever the municipality has both committed the property to public use and the public has accepted it for such use. 992 A.2d at 85 n.14; Philadelphia Museums, 96 A. at 125 ; see also Appeal of Leech, 371 Pa. 84 , 89 A.2d 351, 353 (1952) (“A municipality’s 2016Clair, 799 A.2d 188 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002) (holding that the lease of park land for the construction of a communications tower as a sale or alienation under the DDPA). 13 As this Court has explained: “Under the common law public trust doctrine, when land has been dedicated and accepted for public use, a political subdivision is estopped from interfering with or revoking the grant at least so long as the land continues to be used, in good faith, for the purpose for which it was originally dedicated.” In re Estate of Ryerss, 987 A.2d 1231 , 1237 n.8 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (citation omitted). *** Regardi | 3 | 2012–2017 |
In Re Gross
green
1 sentence2017Borough of Downingtown v. Friends of Kardon Park, 55 A.3d 163 , 169 n.9 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012). 7 Act of December 15, 1959, P.L. 772, 53 P.S. §§ 3381-3386. 8 On December 2, 2016, PHA filed a brief and the City and PAID filed a joinder in PHA’s brief. 5 decision in In re Gross, . . . 382 A.2d 116 ([Pa.] 1978) as follows: The problems arise from events occurring after the lawsuit has gotten under way—changes in the facts or in the law—which allegedly deprive the litigant of the necessary stake in the outcome. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Borough of Downingtown v. Friends of Kardon Park
green
1 sentence2017Borough of Downingtown v. Friends of Kardon Park, 55 A.3d 163 , 169 n.9 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2012). 7 Act of December 15, 1959, P.L. 772, 53 P.S. §§ 3381-3386. 8 On December 2, 2016, PHA filed a brief and the City and PAID filed a joinder in PHA’s brief. 5 decision in In re Gross, . . . 382 A.2d 116 ([Pa.] 1978) as follows: The problems arise from events occurring after the lawsuit has gotten under way—changes in the facts or in the law—which allegedly deprive the litigant of the necessary stake in the outcome. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
White v. Township of Upper St. Clair
green
1 sentence2016Clair, 799 A.2d 188 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2002) (holding that the lease of park land for the construction of a communications tower as a sale or alienation under the DDPA). 13 As this Court has explained: “Under the common law public trust doctrine, when land has been dedicated and accepted for public use, a political subdivision is estopped from interfering with or revoking the grant at least so long as the land continues to be used, in good faith, for the purpose for which it was originally dedicated.” In re Estate of Ryerss, 987 A.2d 1231 , 1237 n.8 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2009) (citation omitted). *** Regardi | 1 | 2016–2016 |
In Re the Estate of Berry
neutral
1 sentence2009Board of Trustees of Philadelphia Museums v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, 251 Pa. 115, 123-25 , 96 A. 123, 125-26 (1915). [9] Although not specifically stated by the orphans' court, this reasoning also appears to explain why the orphans' court did not consider whether Appellants were entitled to relief under the DDPA by itself, without regard to the Inalienable Property Act. [10] Section 7740.3 provides, in relevant part: (a) General Rule.—Except as otherwise provided in subsection (b), if a particular charitable purpose becomes unlawful, impracticable or wasteful: (1) the trust | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Philadelphia Housing Authority v. Commonwealth, Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board
green
2 sentences2009Giving the terms of Section 2 of the Act the meaning dictated by the context in which they are used, Philadelphia Housing Authority v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 508 Pa. 576 , 499 A.2d 294 (1985), and applying the qualifying language of “where no formal record appears as to acceptance by the political [subdivision” to the immediately preceding words but not to those more remote, Packer , the Court holds that the Act applies when there is a formal record of acceptance and dedication of donated property. 2009Giving the terms of Section 2 of the Act the meaning dictated by the context in which they are used, Philadelphia Housing Authority v. Pennsylvania Labor Relations Board, 508 Pa. 576 , 499 A.2d 294 (1985), and applying the qualifying language of “where no formal record appears as to acceptance by the political [subdivision” to the immediately preceding words but not to those more remote, Packer , the Court holds that the Act applies when there is a formal record of acceptance and dedication of donated property. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.