Legal Opinion

L. Grossman & Sons, Inc. v. Town of Gilford

Supreme Court of New Hampshire

Decided June 27, 1978No. 78-033PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGrimes, J.

The question in this case is whether plaintiff has such a vested right in the maintenance of sign as a preexisting nonconforming use as to prevent the town, under its zoning ordinance, from requiring plaintiff to remove it without compensation and substitute a much smaller sign. We hold that plaintiff has such a right.

Plaintiff appealed to the superior court from the zoning board of adjustment’s denial of a variance and requested the court to rule that plaintiff has a vested right to maintain a sign at its present size and location. There was a hearing before a Master, Leonard C. Hardwick,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Metzger v. Town of BrentwoodSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1977
  2. Piper v. MeredithSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1970
  3. Lachapelle v. GoffstownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1967
  4. McKinney v. RileySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1964
  5. Flanagan v. Town of HollisSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1972

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Burrows v. City of KeeneSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1981
  2. New London Land Use Ass'n v. New London Zoning Board of AdjustmentSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1988
  3. Dugas v. Town of ConwaySupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1984
  4. Town of Hampton v. BrustSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1982
  5. Girard v. Town of AllenstownSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1981

10 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