City of Pgh ZBA,et al. v. Lamar Advantage - No. (Granted) (petitions for allowance of appeal)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT LAMAR ADVANTAGE GP COMPANY, LLC, : : Respondents : : : v. : : : CITY OF PITTSBURGH ZONING BOARD : OF ADJUSTMENT AND CITY OF : PITTSBURGH, : : Petitioners : No. 409 WAL 2019 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 6th day of April, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED TO the issue set forth below. Allocatur is DENIED as to all remaining issues. The issue, as stated by Petitioner, is: Whether the holding of the panel in this matter that a static vinyl advertising sign could replace an electronic advertising sign was inconsistent with the holding in Lamar Advertising Co. v. Zoning Hearing Bd. of the Municipality of Monroeville, 939 A.2d 994 (Pa.Commw. Ct. 2007) that static vinyl advertising signs and electronic advertising signs are so different that one cannot simply replace the other without application for and issuance of a new zoning and building permit?
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.
