Reading Area Water Authority v. Schuylkill River Greenway Ass'n

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that for purposes of eminent domain, “[t]he question of what constitutes a public use is highly fact-dependent”
• in eminent domain appeals, courts must “consider factual findings deferentially and resolve legal issues de novo”
• even 5 assuming a condemnation can pass constitutional scrutiny, it must also be statutorily permissible
• “[B]ecause eminent domain is in derogation of private rights, any legislative authority for its use must be strictly construed in favor of the landowner”
• “[t]he Legislature’s decision to exempt regulated public utilities . . . from the preclusive rule set forth in Section 204(a
• eminent domain power can only be exercised within the limitations established by law

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).