Zoning Bd. v. Housing Appeals

3 Citing cases

  1. Zoning Bd. App. Canton v. Housing App. Com

    76 Mass. App. Ct. 467 (Mass. App. Ct. 2010)   Cited 6 times

    CIVIL ACTION commenced in the Superior Court Department on October 27, 2005. Following review by the Supreme Judicial Court, 451 Mass. 158 (2008), a motion for judgment on the pleadings was heard by John P. Connor, Jr., J., and entry of judgment was ordered by him. Mark Bobrowski for the plaintiff.

  2. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Amesbury v. Housing Appeals

    457 Mass. 748 (Mass. 2010)   Cited 28 times

    Again, the HAC recognized that the developer need comply with local requirements, but modified the provisions only to ensure that compliance was measured by local requirements in effect on the date of the application to the board, rather than at the time of the board's decision or when a building permit is sought. Cf. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Canton v. Housing Appeals Comm., 451 Mass. 158, 161, 884 N.E.2d 464 (2008); Taylor v. Housing Appeals Comm., 451 Mass. 149, 155, 883 N.E.2d 1222 (2008). The only decision or order of the HAC in the record of this case is its summary decision.

  3. Biogen IDEC MA, Inc. v. Treasurer & Receiver General

    454 Mass. 174 (Mass. 2009)   Cited 36 times
    Rejecting the state's argument—that the regulation was not substantive and could apply retroactively as the business had no right to unclaimed funds—because the regulation would make the business liable for the funds while the prior regulation would not

    In these circumstances, the amended regulations cannot be retroactively applied. The Treasurer's reliance on Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Canton v. Housing Appeals Comm., 451 Mass. 158 (2008), and Taylor v. Housing Appeals Comm., 451 Mass. 149 (2008), is misplaced as neither case involved the retroactive application of regulations clearly at odds with a predecessor's regulations and internal policy. 3.