Hunters Brook Realty Corp. v. Zoning Board of Appeals
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtGreaney, J.
The last paragraph of G. L. c. 40A, § 10, as amended by St. 1977, c. 829, § 4B, provides that “[i]f the rights authorized by a variance are not exercised within one year of the date of grant of such variance they shall lapse, and may be reestablished only after notice and a new hearing pursuant to this section.” The issue in this case is whether the holder of a variance which has lapsed must show anew that he is entitled to the variance in order to reestablish it. We conclude that he must, i.e., that the reestablishment of a lapsed variance requires a new showing which satisfies the criteria…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Hanlon v. RollinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
- Industrial Finance Corp. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
- Pendergast v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
- Warren v. Zoning Board of Appeals of AmherstMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- Aldoupolis v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Britton v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
- Hogan v. HayesMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
- Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1997
- Cornell v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
- Grady v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.