New London v. Leskiewicz

2 Citing cases

  1. Peabody v. Town of Windham

    142 N.H. 488 (N.H. 1997)   Cited 14 times

    The well drilling business predated zoning restrictions prohibiting its existence, and therefore, it operated as a lawful, nonconforming use. See New London v. Leskiewicz, 110 N.H. 462, 465, 272 A.2d 856, 859 (1970). The plaintiffs acquired the rights to the nonconforming use when they purchased the property.

  2. City of Beech Grove v. Schmith

    164 Ind. App. 536 (Ind. Ct. App. 1975)   Cited 14 times
    In Schmith, as in Jacobs, we focused on the nature and character of the use in deciding whether a change in the nonconforming use was permissible.

    See Annot., 87 A.L.R.2d, supra, pp. 15 and 71. See also, New London v. Leskiewicz (1970), 110 N.H. 462, 272 A.2d 856, 860. An additional factor is whether the nonconformity is in the character of the structure itself apart from the use, or in the character of the use apart from the structure.