Legal Opinion

Cutter v. Town of Durham

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided February 14, 1980No. 79-224PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrimes, C.J.

The question in this case is whether the town of Durham is collaterally estopped from litigating the issue of its authority, under RSA 36:19-a, to require site plan approval before the plaintiff changes the internal use of his property from one permitted use to another. We hold that the town is estopped.

The facts of this case are undisputed. The plaintiff owns property located on Main Street in the town of Durham, in a zone classified for business. The property has been utilized for permitted uses since before the enactment of the zoning ordinance. On March 24,1978, the plaintiff applied for…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Parklane Hosiery Co. v. ShoreSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  3. Bricker v. CraneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1978
  4. Sanderson v. BalfourSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1968

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Conley v. SpillersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1983
  2. Aubert v. AubertSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987
  3. Joseph J. Fiumara v. Fireman's Fund Insurance CompaniesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1984
  4. Dennis Kathios v. General Motors CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
  5. Scheele v. Village District of EidelweissSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982

8 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