Legal Opinion

Kiernan v. City of Salem

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided May 22, 2003No. 01-P-890PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKaplan, J.

As a “private redeveloper,” the plaintiff purchased *182land from the Salem Redevelopment Authority in the area of the city’s urban renewal plan and built upon it. Later the city, in connection with the extension of a museum, a project within the renewal plan, discontinued a street adjacent to the plaintiff’s property. Upon analysis of the facts to be recounted, we agree with the Superior Court judge that on no suggested theory was the plaintiff entitled to compensation for the discontinuance, and we shall affirm the judgment for the defendants.

On February 23, 1967, the city of Salem, acting…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Davis v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891
  2. Brakken v. Minneapolis & St. Louis Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1881
  3. Leonard v. Town of BrimfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1996
  4. LaBarge v. Chief Admin. Justice of the Trial CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1988
  5. Hammond v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1891

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Zaskey v. Town of WhatelyMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004
  2. Soeder v. County CommissionersMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2004

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API