[PDF] Top 20 Chapter 14: Land Use Law

... The Court rejected the contentions that shift- ing from the permitted uses section to the special permit section, removing tennis courts from the final adopted sec[r] ... See full document

... The Supreme Judicial Court ruled that, notwith- standing the fact that ordinarily under the provisions of General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 7 A, the zoning applicable at [r] ... See full document

... Supreme Judicial Court held that the Department, under General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 10, may, after public notice and hearing, exempt a building or land to be [r] ... See full document

... While upholding the superior court's decision to annul the decision of the board, the Appeals Court held that the trial court erred in or- dering approval of the plai[r] ... See full document

... adjusted children requiring special education or medical treatment); Armstrong v. This dual requirement does not exist in the new enactment.. The public policy to e[r] ... See full document

... R & P Realty Corp." In that case, the Court held that final action of a plan- ning board in approving a subdivision control plan occurred upon the board's filing it[r] ... See full document

... The plaintiff had prevailed below on the theory that his plan was not subject to the by-law, which was not yet perfected law at the time; that the purported disap[r] ... See full document

... 27 The uses the trial court had found, such as agriculture, recreation, birdwatching, kite flying, protection of a view, and conservation, were ruled not to be pr[r] ... See full document

... Supreme Court of New Hampshire ruled that the state's statutory scheme for placing developmentally impaired individuals in various locations throughout the state furthered [r] ... See full document

... practices. The Law allows developers to avoid exclusionary zoning de- vices by obtaining comprehensive building permits from zoning boards of appeals, instead of obtaining[r] ... See full document

... Appealing from the decision in the housing court, the plaintiffs con- tended that the Board exceeded its authority in granting the special permits in several ways: (1) si[r] ... See full document

... Initially, the Appeals Court noted that it was satisfied with the result reached by the trial judge in all but the decision concerning the lights.21 The court [r] ... See full document

... In reversing the superior court and annulling the decision of the board, the Appeals Court noted that the board lacked the authority to grant Marasco either a special per[r] ... See full document

... The wording of section 17, however, does not specifically address judicial review of constructive approval. Thus, a significant dilemma arises concerning the appropriate time for ch[r] ... See full document

... 4,21 the United States District Court for the District of Delaware allowed preinduction review of certain board action in- fringing upon such rights of the regist[r] ... See full document

... Edgerly,' the Supreme Judicial Court was asked 2 to decide whether a trial judge could compel a defendant to give notice of his intention to present an alibi defense[r] ... See full document

... indication of "judicial legislating'' on the part of the oourt as it is a measure of the extensive ambiguities oontained in the statutory procedures established [r] ... See full document

... the term "general health supplies, care, social, rehabilitative, or educa- tional services and accommodations" shall not include any services and accommodations rates of[r] ... See full document

... After the filing of petitions for judicial review pursuant to Section 14 of Chapter 30A, a judge of the Superior Court ruled that, despite the language of Acts of 1963, Chap[r] ... See full document

... The Justices also distinguished the compulsion to publi_sh imposed on broadcasters licensed by the federal government from one imposed on a newspaper or magazine publis[r] ... See full document