condemnation claim in Pennsylvania

2025A judgment in trespass, however, does not bar a subsequent condemnation claim.” In Re Mountaintop Area Joint Sanitary Authority, 166 A.3d at 561 (quoting Matter of Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Authority of Pittsburgh, 458 A.2d 622, 623 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1983)). 11 If not, the preliminary objections must be sustained and the petition dismissed or allowed to be amended.

2022A judgment in trespass does not bar a subsequent condemnation claim.” In Re Mountaintop Area, 166 A.3d at 561 (citing Matter of Condemnation by Urban Redevelopment Auth. of Pittsburgh, 458 A.2d 622, 623 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1983)). 8 are applicable to both contracts and easement grants, a court must interpret undefined words in an easement grant according to their ordinary meanings.

2022See id.; Pines Plaza Bowling, Inc. v. Rossview, Inc., 145 A.2d 672, 676 (Pa. 1958).

2005See, e.g., Pane v. Department of Highways, 422 Pa. 489, 497-500 , 222 A.2d 913, 917-18 (1966) (holding that a cause of action relative to an asserted de facto condemnation did not arise until physical restrictions to access were effected, since, until such time, the claim was speculative and remote, as no compensable injury had occurred; thus, the mere filing of a highway plan showing a change of grade that would interfere with access did not give rise to a condemnation claim); In re Construction of Legislative Route 115, 80 Pa.Cmwlth. 165, 170-72 , 471 A.2d 1267, 1269-70 (1984) (relying on Pa

2005See, e.g., Pane v. Department of Highways, 422 Pa. 489, 497-500 , 222 A.2d 913, 917-18 (1966) (holding that a cause of action relative to an asserted de facto condemnation did not arise until physical restrictions to access were effected, since, until such time, the claim was speculative and remote, as no compensable injury had occurred; thus, the mere filing of a highway plan showing a change of grade that would interfere with access did not give rise to a condemnation claim); In re Construction of Legislative Route 115, 80 Pa.Cmwlth. 165, 170-72 , 471 A.2d 1267, 1269-70 (1984) (relying on Pa

2005See, e.g., Pane v. Department of Highways, 422 Pa. 489, 497-500 , 222 A.2d 913, 917-18 (1966) (holding that a cause of action relative to an asserted de facto condemnation did not arise until physical restrictions to access were effected, since, until such time, the claim was speculative and remote, as no compensable injury had occurred; thus, the mere filing of a highway plan showing a change of grade that would interfere with access did not give rise to a condemnation claim); In re Construction of Legislative Route 115, 80 Pa.Cmwlth. 165, 170-72 , 471 A.2d 1267, 1269-70 (1984) (relying on Pa

2005See, e.g., Pane v. Department of Highways, 422 Pa. 489, 497-500 , 222 A.2d 913, 917-18 (1966) (holding that a cause of action relative to an asserted de facto condemnation did not arise until physical restrictions to access were effected, since, until such time, the claim was speculative and remote, as no compensable injury had occurred; thus, the mere filing of a highway plan showing a change of grade that would interfere with access did not give rise to a condemnation claim); In re Construction of Legislative Route 115, 80 Pa.Cmwlth. 165, 170-72 , 471 A.2d 1267, 1269-70 (1984) (relying on Pa

1993See Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc. v. Crown Plaza Group, Tex., 845 S.W.2d 340 (1992).