Condemnation by the North Strabane Twp. Municipal Authority, Washington County, PA ~ Appeal of: L.D. Fowler and C.L. Fowler, Condemnation by the North Strabane Twp. Municipal Authority, Washington County, PA ~ Appeal of: L.D. Fowler and C.L. Fowler

Background

North Strabane Township Municipal Authority filed a Declaration of Taking to acquire a 25-foot sewer easement across Lawrence and Cynthia Fowler’s property to install and maintain an underground sewer line.
The Declaration and attached materials included broad language stating the property was taken "for any purpose whatsoever," and referenced a simple plot drawing.
The Fowlers filed preliminary objections contesting: (1) the Declaration’s overly broad purpose language; (2) inadequate property description/plan; (3) improper service of notice; (4) failure to post the statutory bond; and other technical defects.
The Court of Common Pleas overruled the preliminary objections; the Fowlers appealed to the Commonwealth Court.
The Commonwealth Court reversed the trial court’s order on multiple grounds and remanded, finding several statutory and sufficiency defects in the taking.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Declaration’s phrase "for any purpose whatsoever" makes the taking excessive	Fowlers: language is unbounded and permits more taking/use than public purpose requires	Authority: phrase is a catch‑all for maintenance/upkeep and does not permit literal unlimited use	Held: phrase is excessive and impermissibly broad; taking not limited to what public use reasonably requires
Whether Notice contained a sufficient property description/plan	Fowlers: plot plan attached is bare, not scale‑verified, lacks measurements and was not actually attached to the Notice in the record	Authority: a plot plan suffices under §305(c)(9); metes and bounds not required	Held: plan as presented is insufficient for identification and record does not show plan was attached to the Notice; Notice fails §§304/305(c) requirements
Whether service of the Notice complied with §305(a)/(b) timing and methods	Fowlers: Notice was served simultaneously with Declaration (not after) and service by certified mail that was unclaimed required alternate posting/publication which was not done	Authority: service within 30 days satisfied timing; Fowlers received the required information so service was adequate	Held: timing requirement not violated by serving together, but service by certified/regular mail that failed was insufficient because Authority did not pursue posting/publication under §305(b)(2); service defective
Whether Authority was required to file a bond with the Declaration under §303(a)	Fowlers: Authority lacked taxing power and therefore must file bond; none was filed	Authority: trial court found Authority had sufficient funds and bond unnecessary	Held: Authority is not a taxing authority and must file the bond; trial court abused its discretion by excusing bond filing

Key Cases Cited

In re Condemnation by Beaver Falls Mun. Auth. for Penndale Water Line Extension, 960 A.2d 933 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2008) (establishes that property may be taken only in amount and estate reasonably required by public use)
In re City of Scranton, 572 A.2d 250 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1990) (addresses sufficiency/amount of security for condemnation and deference to trial court on security amount)
Dickson v. Pennsylvania Power & Light Co., 423 A.2d 711 (Pa. Super. 1980) (explains that a description must enable a surveyor to locate and identify property and that reference to an attached plan requires that plan actually be attached)
Milford Traumbauersville Area Sewer Authority v. Approximately .753 Acres of Land, 358 A.2d 450 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1976) (recognizes that a drawing or plan may suffice instead of metes and bounds when adequate to identify the taking)
Eichman v. McKeon, 824 A.2d 305 (Pa. Super. 2003) (addresses notice sufficiency and appellate review of trial findings)