Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 12/21/2015

Gilbert, R. v. Synagro Central Aplts

Citations

131 A.3d 1
634 Pa. 651
2015 Pa. LEXIS 2998
2015 WL 9282354

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

holding that plaintiffs \have not identified any duty under Pennsylvania law that requires a property owner to use his or her property in such a manner that it protects neighboring landowners from offensive odors or other nuisance conditions.\
explaining that application of biosolids as fertilizer on farmland is a “normal agricultural operation” as defined in Section 4(a) of the Right to Farm Act, 3 P.S. § 954(a)
explaining the broadening of the term normal agricultural operation in the 1998 amendments to RTFA
“Resort to the rules of statutory construction is to be made only when there is ambiguity.”
“[T]here may be cases in which a statute of repose’s applicability turns on resolution of factual issues[.]”
the scope of review for the grant of summary judgment is plenary; the trial court’s order will be reversed only where it is established that court committed an error of law or clearly abused its discretion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Saylor, Eakin, Baer, Todd, Stevens

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Gilbert, R. v. Synagro Central Aplts

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Gilbert, R. v. Synagro Central Aplts
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2015-12-21

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.