The state Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments over whether a property owner seeking a use variance should be entitled only to the minimum variance necessary to provide relief.
The case raises an apparent issue of first impression.
The state Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments over whether a property owner seeking a use variance should be entitled only to the minimum variance necessary to provide relief.
August 19, 2013 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The state Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments over whether a property owner seeking a use variance should be entitled only to the minimum variance necessary to provide relief.
The case raises an apparent issue of first impression.
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
Consulting Magazine recognizes leaders in technology across three categories Leadership, Client Service and Innovation.
Celebrate outstanding achievement in law firms, chambers, in-house legal departments and alternative business structures.
Health Law Associate CT Shipman is seeking an associate to join our national longstanding health law practice. Candidates must have t...
Shipman & Goodwin LLP is seeking two associates to expand our national commercial real estate lending practice. Candidates should have ...
Epstein Becker & Green is seeking an associate to joins its Commercial Litigation practice in our Columbus or Cincinnati offices. Ca...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS