Legal Opinion
MUNICIPAL LIGHT CO, ASHBURNHAM v. Commonwealth
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided February 25, 1993No. 91-P-910PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtKass, J.
In their brief, the plaintiffs, who are municipal light companies or departments, state a prodigious twenty-six issues on appeal but these rather quickly boil down to three. All are based on actions taken by the Commonwealth to delay the operation of Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant Unit 1 (“Seabrook”) in Seabrook, New Hampshire. Seabrook, since the plan for its construction surfaced in 1968, has generated seemingly countless reactions of super-heated litigation and civil disobedience. As a consequence of the Commonwealth’s delaying actions, the plaintiffs (which we shall sometimes refer to as…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- Lucas v. South Carolina Coastal CouncilSupreme Court of the United States · 1992
- United States Trust Co. of NY v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Nader v. CitronMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- Whitney v. City of WorcesterMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
- New Orleans Waterworks Co. v. Louisiana Sugar Refining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1888
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Massachusetts Federation of Teachers v. Board of EducationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2002
- Pontremoli v. Spaulding Rehabilitation HospitalMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
- Commonwealth v. H&R Block, Inc.Massachusetts Superior Court · 2008
- Sheriff v. Labor Relations CommissionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
- Burke v. Board of Appeal on Motor Vehicle Liability Polices and BondsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2016
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.