Justices to Mull Zoning of Airbnb-Style Rental Properties
The case could have broad implications for residents who rent out their homes on Airbnb and other lodging networks.
March 01, 2018 at 11:21 AM
3 minute read
In a case that could have broad implications for residents who rent out their homes on Airbnb and other lodging networks, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has agreed to hear arguments over a zoning board's decision to penalize a property owner for operating a single-family home as a short-term vacation rental.
Hamilton Township's zoning board appealed the Commonwealth Court's June 21 ruling in Slice of Life v. Hamilton Township Zoning Hearing Board that property owner Val Kleyman did not violate residential zoning codes in the Monroe County municipality by operating a short-term rental. The decision was reached by a split three-judge panel of Judges Mary Hannah Leavitt, Joseph Cosgrove and James Gardner Collins.
According to the court's order granting allocatur, the justices have agreed to decide a single question: “Whether the Commonwealth Court disregarded the binding precedent of this court, set forth in the case Albert v. Zoning Hearing Board of North Abington Township, 578 Pa. 439, 854 A.2d 491 (2004), by finding that the purely transient use of a property as part of a commercial short-term vacation rental business was a permitted use in a residential zoning district?”
In Slice of Life, the township argued that Kleyman's use of the house as a “transient lodging enterprise” was completely at odds with the single-family home residential district ordinance.
Cosgrove wrote in the court's majority opinion that the as-written language of the ordinance was ambiguous on whether such use of the home was permissible, and thus up for interpretation.
Kleyman and her company, Slice of Life LLC, “have proven that ambiguity exists in the language of the ordinance. Because of that ambiguity, we are required to interpret the language of the ordinance in favor of the landowner and against any implied extension of restrictions on the use of one's property,” Cosgrove said.
Despite this, the trial court held that Kleyman's use of the property as a short-term rental created public health and safety concern, specifically regarding the untested septic system on the property, upholding the ruling of the zoning board.
However, Cosgrove said the board offered only speculation on the possible harm that could befall the community because of the septic system or tenant conduct.
“The record identifies there was never a septic system problem or violation at the property. Regarding the actions of tenants and their guests at the property, the adjoining neighbor testified he witnessed improper and indecent conduct emanating from some guests,” Cosgrove said. “The adjoining neighbor also testified the Pennsylvania State Police (PSP) were called in November 2013. However, when questioned as to what actions the PSP took in response to the calls around that time, the adjoining neighbor testified that '[t]he [PSP] felt that because the township had not, as yet, determined there to be a violation that they would prefer to attend to these issues subsequent to a[n enforcement notice] decision made by the township.'”
Kleyman is represented by William Higgs of Mountain Top.
“They took an awful long time to grant this,” Higgs said, adding that the case could be the first in the state to deal with short-term rentals of single-family residences.
He also added, “People have been renting houses at the Jersey Shore for a hundred years” without having to worry about zoning issues.
Marc Wolfe of Newman, Williams, Mishkin, Corveleyn, Wolfe & Fareri represents the township zoning board and did not return a call seeking comment.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLackawanna County Lawyer Fails to Shake Legal Mal Claims Over Sex With Client
3 minute readPa. Superior Court Rules Pizza Chain Liable for Franchisee Driver's Crash
4 minute readPatent Pending ... and Pending ... and Pending? Brace Yourself for Longer Waits
3 minute readBoosting Litigation and Employee Benefits Practices, Two Am Law 100 Firms Grow in Pittsburgh
3 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Munger, Gibson Dunn Billed $63 Million to Snap in 2024
- 2January Petitions Press High Court on Guns, Birth Certificate Sex Classifications
- 3'A Waste of Your Time': Practice Tips From Judges in the Oakland Federal Courthouse
- 4Judge Extends Tom Girardi's Time in Prison Medical Facility to Feb. 20
- 5Supreme Court Denies Trump's Request to Pause Pending Environmental Cases
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250