Court Opinion

ID: 9748367
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 16:00:44.520807+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:25:34.824231
License: Public Domain

SAYLOR, Justice,
dissenting.
While I agree with the majority’s formulation of the standard to be applied in evaluating whether an entity reheves the government of some of its burden, I would not reach the merits of whether Appellant satisfies this standard. Instead, my preference would be to remand to the common pleas court, which did not consider the appropriate range of factors because it was bound by Community Service Found., Inc. v. Bucks County Bd. of Assessment and Revision of Taxes, 672 A.2d 373 (Pa.Cmwlth.1996), particularly as the determination *685of whether an entity qualifies as a purely public charity poses a mixed question of law and fact that is to be determined by the common pleas court in the first instance. See Mars Area Sch. Dist. v. United Presbyterian Women’s Ass’n of N. Am., 554 Pa. 824, 326, 721 A.2d 360, 361 (1998); Unionville-Chadds Ford Sch. Dist. v. Chester County Bd. of Assessment Appeals, 552 Pa. 212, 217, 714 A.2d 397, 399 (1998).
Justice EAKIN joins this dissenting opinion.