From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Deibel v. Yorke

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Jan 22, 1976
340 N.E.2d 897 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)

Opinion

January 22, 1976.

The case was submitted on briefs.

Mary Deibel, pro se.

Walter L. Sullivan for Robert Yorke William H. Ohrenberger for Board of Appeals of Scituate.



1. The Superior Court had power to remand the case to the board of appeals (board) for further findings and a statement of the board's reasons for granting the variance. Roberts-Haverhill Associates v. City Council of Haverhill, 2 Mass. App. Ct. 715, 717-719 (1974). O'Brian v. Board of Appeals of Brockton, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 740 (1975). 2. The board was not required to take the further action directed within either of the appeal periods set out in G.L.c. 40A, § 21 (as in effect prior to St. 1973, c. 1114, § 4). The board could and did take its further action within a reasonable time. 3. Nothing in G.L.c. 40A, § 17 (as amended through St. 1973, c. 296, § 2) or § 18 (as amended through St. 1971, c. 1018), required the board to hold a further public hearing in order to consider the evidence taken at the first hearing or make further findings based on that evidence. Selectmen of Kingston v. Board of Appeals of Kingston, 3 Mass. App. Ct. 704 (1975). The judgment entered on August 23, 1974, is affirmed with double costs from September 23, 1974.

So ordered.


Summaries of

Deibel v. Yorke

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Jan 22, 1976
340 N.E.2d 897 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
Case details for

Deibel v. Yorke

Case Details

Full title:ANDREW F. DEIBEL another vs. ROBERT E. YORKE another

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Jan 22, 1976

Citations

340 N.E.2d 897 (Mass. App. Ct. 1976)
4 Mass. App. Ct. 770

Citing Cases

Quinn v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Dalton

In light of circumstances indicating: (1) that the local boards and their members received substantial…