Larsen v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of the City of Pittsburgh
Pennsylvania Supreme Court
543 Pa. 415, 672 A.2d 286 (1996)
- Written by Tanya Munson, JD
Facts
Rolf Larsen (plaintiff) owned a house with a very steep backyard that sloped toward the Ohio River. Larsen obtained a variance to add a 20-by-20-foot deck off the rear of the house. When Larsen had purchased the house, there was enough space to build a deck that would have complied with the ordinance. However, because Larsen had built an addition to the house and because of the steep slope of the property, Larsen was unable to construct an area for his toddler son to play without obtaining a variance. Michael and Theresa Nuzzo, residents of a multiunit condominium next door to Larsen, appealed the grant of the variance. The zoning board found that Larsen would suffer an unnecessary hardship from a denial of the variance because Larsen would be denied the reasonable use of his land if he could not provide a play area for his son. The Nuzzos appealed the decision of the zoning board. The trial court ruled that Larsen had failed to meet the criteria needed to support a variance. Larsen appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Castille, J.)
What to do next…
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.