Legal Opinion

Blair v. Department of Conservation & Recreation

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided August 26, 2010PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtCowin, J.

The Watershed Management Act, G. L. c. 92Aih, §§ 1-20 (Act), is designed to protect certain water systems that are critical to the public water supply. The plaintiffs1 own lakefront property located within a 200-foot buffer zone created by the Act for land abutting particular sources of drinking water. Pursuant to G. L. c. 92Alh, § 5, alterations within that buffer zone are prohibited unless a variance is issued. The plaintiffs’ single-family home is located on the property. To increase the size of their lawn and double the extent of their existing sandy beach, the plaintiffs sought a…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  2. Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
  3. Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
  4. Loretto v. Teleprompter Manhattan CATV Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981

25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Mack Phillips v. Montgomery County, TennesseeTennessee Supreme Court · 2014
  2. Burbank Apartments Tenant Association v. KargmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2016
  3. Fitchburg Gas & Electric Light Co. v. Department of Public UtilitiesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2014
  4. ASHLEY M. MILLS v. CITY OF SPRINGFIELD and AnotherMassachusetts Superior Court · 2024
  5. Fbt Everett Realty, LLC v. Massachusetts Gaming Commission v. Wynn Ma, LLCMassachusetts Superior Court · 2024

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API