Legal Opinion

Hunters Brook Realty Corp. v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided June 24, 1982PublishedCited by 13 opinions

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

  1. Hanlon v. RollinsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1934
  2. Industrial Finance Corp. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975
  3. Pendergast v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1954
  4. Warren v. Zoning Board of Appeals of AmherstMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
  5. Aldoupolis v. CommonwealthMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Britton v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2003
  2. Hogan v. HayesMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
  3. Duracraft Corp. v. Holmes Products Corp.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1997
  4. Cornell v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2009
  5. Grady v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2013

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