Case ID: pa_622/html/0162-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

79 A.3d 1094
    In re CONDEMNATION BY the REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF LAWRENCE COUNTY, Pennsylvania, in Fee Simple, Absolute Title, of Land of David C. Hamilton, Situate in Neshannock Township, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, Being Parcel I.D. #25-168200, for the Millennium Park Redevelopment Project. Petition of Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County. In re Condemnation by the Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, in Fee Simple, Absolute Title, of Land of Thomas R. and Christie L. Whittaker, Situate in Neshannock Township, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, Being Parcel I.D. # 25-168201 and 25-438301, for the Millennium Park Redevelopment Project. Petition of Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County. In re Condemnation by the Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, in Fee Simple, Absolute Title, of Land of David C. Hamilton, Situate in Neshannock Township, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, Being Parcel I.D. # 25-168200, for the Millennium Park Redevelopment Project. Petition of Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County. In re Condemnation by the Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, in Fee Simple, Absolute Title, of Land of Thomas R. and Christie L. Whittaker, Situate in Neshannock Township, Lawrence County, Pennsylvania, Being Parcel I.D. # 25-168201 and 25-438301, for the Millennium Park Redevelopment Project. Petition of Redevelopment Authority of Lawrence County.
    Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.
    Nov. 8, 2013.
   ORDER

PER CURIAM.

AND NOW, this 8th day of November, 2013, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is GRANTED, LIMITED to the Petitioner’s first issue in part and second issue, paraphrased as follows for clarity:

1. Whether the Commonwealth Court ignored a statute limiting the reimbursement of attorneys’ fees to the condemnee for fees actually incurred, instead crafting a judicial remedy requiring the condemnor to pay fees not actually incurred by the condemnee?
2. Whether the Commonwealth Court erred in affirming the trial court’s award of $179,000 of $187,000 requested in attorneys’ fees for preparing a fee petition even though the trial court had disallowed over $500,000 of the $1,100,000 in attorneys’ fees requested in the petition?

The Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED in all other respects.