Holsten v. West Goshen Township

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that challenge based on town’s lack of authority to enact land use ordinance “is a substantive question”
• \a challenge based upon the Township's lack of statutory authority to enact the ordinance is a substantive question not subject to the 30-day appeal period.\
• “a challenge based upon the Township’s lack of statutory authori ty to enact the ordinance is a substantive question not subject to the 30-day appeal period.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• White Deer Township v. Napp
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 2009-12-28· cited 24×
• In Re Paynter 2-Lot Subdivision
  Supreme Court of Vermont· 2010-04-05· cited 23×
• Luke v. Cataldi
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2005-09-28· cited 9×
• Smith v. Springfield Township Board of Supervisors
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2001-12-14· cited 5×
• White Deer Township v. Napp
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 2007-07-19· cited 2×

Cites

4 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Bliss Excavating Co. v. Luzerne County
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1965-06-30· cited 51×
• Roeder v. Hatfield Borough Council
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1970-07-02· cited 38×
• Hodge v. Zoning Hearing Board of West Bradford Township
  Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania· 1973-11-29· cited 22×
• McArthur v. Mt. Lebanon Township
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1960-12-01· cited 9×