Legal Opinion
Rodgers v. Conservation Commission of Barnstable
Massachusetts Appeals Court
Decided August 24, 2006No. 05-P-778PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtGreenberg, J.
The conservation commission of Barnstable (commission), on the ground that the plaintiffs’ proposed permanent pier interfered with recreational shellfishing, declined *201to issue an order of conditions authorizing its construction. The commission’s decision was based on G. L. c. 131, § 40, the State Wetlands Protection Act, and art. 27 of the Barnstable Wetlands Protection By-law (by-law). On review in the nature of certiorari (G. L. c. 249, § 4), a judge of the Superior Court concluded that the commission’s decision was not supported by substantial evidence and annulled it. We think the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- New Boston Garden Corp. v. Board of AssessorsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- Boston Edison Co. v. Board of Selectmen of ConcordMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1968
- Cohen v. Board of Registration in PharmacyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1966
- Lovequist v. Conservation Commission of DennisMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1979
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Oyster Creek Preservation, Inc. v. Conservation CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
- United States Gypsum Co. v. Executive Office of Environmental AffairsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- Conroy v. Conservation CommissionMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2009
- Pheeney v. HouleMassachusetts Superior Court · 2008
- CITY OF BOSTON v. QUINCY CONSERVATION COMMISSION & OthersMassachusetts Superior Court · 2020
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.