# Murphy v. Town of Cape Elizabeth > Superior Court of Maine ยท July 3, 2014 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10810514 ## Case - **Court:** Superior Court of Maine - **Decided:** July 3, 2014 - **Precedential status:** Unpublished - **Opinion:** Opinion - **Judges:** Thomas D. Warren - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10810514 ## Opinion text EN IE RED AUG o 6 2914 STATE OF MAINE SUPERIOR COURT CUMBERLAND, ss. CIVIL ACTION Docket No. AP-13-67 1D w-cum- 0'1-'0 2:J-l4- MAYNARD MURPHY, et al, Plaintiffs v. ORDER STATE oF MAINE TOWN OF CAPE ELIZABETH, et al, Cumberland. ~.Clerk's Office Defendants JUL 0 0 2014 Before the court is an appeal by Maynard and Debor~,Q,~J~Ptwo September 24, 2013 decisions of the Cape Elizabeth Zoning Board of Appeals (ZBA). Before the ZBA the Murphys were seeking to challenge the issuance of a building permit issued to Marshall Goldman and Pilot Point LLC for the construction of an accessory structure consisting of ornamental outdoor granite steps on property owned by Pilot Point LLC at 27 Pilot Point Road in Cape Elizabeth. 1 The Murphys were also seeking to challenge a determination by the Code Enforcement Officer with respect to the location of the boundary of the Shoreland Zoning District as it related to 27 Pilot Point Road. The two challenges are related because the Murphys' objection to the granite steps is based on the theory that the addition of those steps results in a greater amount of impervious surface than allowed under Shoreland Zoning. If the boundary as determined by the Code Enforcement Officer is correct, however, it appears that this challenge would fail. The record indicates that Marshall Goldman owns Pilot Point LLC, which is the record owner of the property at 27 Pilot Point Road where Goldman resides. The Goldman property faces the ocean, and a paper street runs along the seaward boundary of the Goldman property. This is the second appeal brought by the Murphys. On the first appeal, the court remanded for a de novo hearing. Murphy v. Goldman, AP-12-60 (order issued May 10, 2013). On the first appeal, the ZBA found that the Murphys had standing. ZBA Decision of November 8, 2012 at 1.2 On remand the ZBA addressed the Murphys' appeals at a meeting on September 24, 2013. At that meeting the ZBA voted 3-3 on whether the Murphys had standing to challenge the issuance of the building permit. Because the Murphys had the burden of demonstrating standing, Nergaard v. Town of Westport Island, 2009 ME 56 \ 1 sx::) ...L\ _ VAN MEER & BET .ANGER \\c...\ C'\l')\ ~ f\ \TO\~ 20 YORK STREET / PORTLPu~ ME 04101 --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/10810514. Public record. Not legal advice.