Board of Selectmen v. Monument Inn, Inc.
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
1. The trial judge did not err in finding that the Dohoney/Reder letter containing the restrictions in issue was a part of “the detailed record of proceedings” as required by G. L. c. 40A, § 18, as amended through St. 1969, c. 870, § 1, and as then in effect. (See now G. L. c. 40A, § 11, as most recently amended by St. 1979, c. 117.) There was evidence to show that: (a) the letter was addressed and delivered to the board by Monument; (b) all correspondence received by the board was filed with the town records; and, (c) this letter, specifically, had been kept with the town records except for…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Cellucci v. Sun Oil Co.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1974
- Dion v. Board of Appeals of WalthamMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
- Ferrante v. Board of Appeals of NorthamptonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1962
- Quality Finance Co. v. HurleyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1958
- Doris v. Police Commissioner of BostonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1978
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Vokes v. Avery W. Lovell, Inc.Massachusetts Appeals Court · 1984
- Charles River Park, Inc. v. Boston Redevelopment AuthorityMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1990
- Hogan v. HayesMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1985
- Petrucci v. Board of AppealsMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1998
- Building Inspector v. KendrickMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1983
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.