In re Incorporation of the Borough of Chilton

646 A.2d 13 (1994)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

In re Incorporation of the Borough of Chilton

Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court
646 A.2d 13 (1994)

SC

Facts

Robert and Susan Mumma and others (plaintiffs) filed a petition to incorporate the Borough of Chilton, a 492-acre tract of land on the Yellow Breeches Creek. The land was mostly undeveloped except for the Mummas’ mansion and a few tenant houses. The Mummas planned to build a golf course on the land with 350 surrounding residential units. The only residents on the land at the time of the petition were the Mummas and their child. The Borough Advisory Committee (the committee) issued a report recommending that incorporation be denied. The committee found that the current plans for the development of Chilton were too speculative. The committee also found that Chilton would struggle to comply with certain legal requirements, including the borough code and the Pennsylvania Election Code, for an indeterminate time after incorporation. The trial court felt constrained by the incorporation statute and rejected the committee’s recommendation. The court granted incorporation because, tracking the statute’s language, Chilton would be a harmonious whole and desirable. Those objecting to the incorporation appealed.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Smith, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership