Camara v. Board of Appeals
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The defendants George E. Frotton, Jr., and Patricia A. Frotton appeal from the judgment entered in the plaintiffs’ favor, whereby the Frottons’ use of their Tewksbury property (locus) was determined to be in violation of the Tewksbury zoning by-law. The locus had apparently become overrun with vehicles and equipment, going far beyond the use of the prior owner, and could not qualify as a protected nonconforming use unless the Frottons could prove that Tewksbury had adopted its first zoning by-law subsequent to 1973, the year in which they acquired the locus. The Frottons *210dispute the judge’s…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Warren v. Zoning Board of Appeals of AmherstMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1981
- In re KeenanMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1943
- Lanner v. Board of Appeal of TewksburyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1964
- In re WelanskyMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1946
- Flynn v. BrassardMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1974
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Commonwealth v. ThurstonMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2002
- Commonwealth v. VazquezMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2005
- Amato v. District Attorney for Cape & Islands DistrictMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2011
- Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc. v. Capital Terminal Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004
- Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc. v. Capital Terminal Co.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2004