In a matter regarding the development of a Wal-Mart supercenter in Whitehall Township, the Board of Supervisors granted a conditional use approval for a planned commercial development. The objectors argued that both the Board and the solicitor should have recused themselves due to conflict of interest involving representation and bias. The Township intervened on the objectors appeal with the same solicitor who had presided at the Board’s hearings for this approval. This court held that “the record must demonstrate bias, prejudice, capricious disbelief or prejudgment” and that “if a judge [or supervisor] thinks he is capable of hearing a case fairly his decision not to withdraw will ordinarily be upheld on appeal.” The objectors prevailed on the remanded issues, and did not question the propriety of the Board proceeding before the Board hearing. Because of this, the record indicates that the Objectors were not prejudiced in any way, and does not contain any other facts that might justify the invalidation of the Board proceeding. The court affirmed the Board’s decision.
Joseph v. N. Whitehall Twp. Bd. of Sup’rs, 16 A.3d 1209, 1212 (Pa. Commw. Ct. 3/112011)
The opinion can be accessed at: http://www.pacourts.us/OpPosting/Cwealth/out/770CD10_3-11-11.pdf
