Middletown Twp v. Stone, Aplt (Concurring Opinion)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
[J-130-2006] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA MIDDLE DISTRICT MIDDLETOWN TOWNSHIP : : v. : : THE LANDS OF JOSEF SEEGAR : STONE, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE : OF SARA SEEGAR STONE, DECEASED, : JOSEF SEEGAR STONE AND : FRANCINE LIDA STONE, EXECUTORS : OF THE ESTATE OF EZRA C. STONE, : A/K/A EZRA STONE, DECEASED, AND : JOSEF S. STONE AND FRANCINE LIDA : STONE : : APPEAL OF: JOSEF SEEGAR STONE : No. 64 MAP 2006 Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered September 15, 2005, at No. 2152 CD 2004, which affirmed the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Bucks County entered September 28, 2004, at Nos. 2000-611925-6 and TPM22-005-007. 882 A.2d 1066 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2005) ARGUED: October 17, 2006 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE SAYLOR DECIDED: December 27, 2007 I join the majority opinion, subject only to a few modest differences. Primarily, I do not regard the finding that a taking is for recreational purposes as a pure conclusion of law. See Majority Opinion, slip op. at 10. Rather, I believe that there is a substantial factual dynamic, and therefore, I would treat it as a mixed question of fact and law. I am fully in line, however, with the majority s central conclusion that a more concrete plan is required to support a taking for recreational purposes than was put into place in this case, at least as reflected in the record presented. Madame Justice Baldwin joins this concurring opinion.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
