Legal Opinion

Rourke v. Rothman

Massachusetts Appeals Court

Decided September 26, 2005No. 04-P-1050PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKafker, J.

In this case, we address the interplay of grandfather clauses in local zoning by-laws and the grandfather provision of the Zoning Act, G. L. c. 40A, § 6, fourth par., as appearing in St. 1975, c. 808, § 3, and as amended by St. 1979, c. 106.2 More precisely, we determine whether, because of c. 40A, § 6, *600a lot that was once buildable due to a local by-law exemption from minimum lot size requirements remains buildable, even after the repeal of that local grandfather exemption. We conclude that c. 40A, § 6, protects the right to build on lots that conformed to existing dimensional requirements…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Adamowicz v. Town of IpswichMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  2. Davis v. Zoning Board of ChathamMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
  3. Tsagronis v. Board of Appeals of WarehamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1993
  4. Inspector of Buildings of Burlington v. MurphyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
  5. DeGrace v. Conservation Commission of HarwichMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1991

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Rourke v. RothmanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 2007
  2. Choate v. Zoning Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2006
  3. Berg v. Town of LexingtonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
  4. Shaw River, Inc. v. PearsonMassachusetts Superior Court · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API