# Waxler v. City of Portland

> Supreme Judicial Court of Maine · January 10, 1983 · 454 A.2d 344

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4946297

## Case

- **Full name:** Alfred J. WAXLER and Your Home, Inc. v. CITY OF PORTLAND and Samuel Hoffses
- **Court:** Supreme Judicial Court of Maine
- **Decided:** January 10, 1983
- **Citations:** 454 A.2d 344; 1983 Me. LEXIS 590
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Carter, Dufresne, McKusick, Nichols, Roberts, Violette, Wathen
- **Cited by:** 2 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/4946297

## Opinion text

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION.
Alfred J. Waxier and Your Home, Inc. were denied a permit to locate a mobile home for use as a single-family dwelling at *345 85 Farnham Street, Portland, in an R-3 residential zone. On their complaint, the Superior Court, Cumberland County, held that the Board of Zoning Appeals erred when it ruled that a mobile home is not a building within the meaning of section 602.-3(A)(1) of the Portland Zoning Ordinance. 1 Upon appeal by the City of Portland we affirm the judgment of the Superior Court.
In Your Home, Inc. v. City of Portland, 432 A.2d 1250 (Me.1981), we had these same parties before us presenting a closely related issue. Although the earlier case involved a permit to construct a mobile home park, the question whether a mobile home was a building, as that term is used in describing uses permitted in an R-3 zone, was squarely presented. Your Home, Inc., 432 A.2d at 1258 . We discern no difference in the circumstances of the present case or in the ordinance language presented here which would warrant a different result. We reaffirm our previous decision that “[t]he ordinance provides no basis for excluding mobile homes from [the] definition [of detached building].” Id.
The entry is:
Judgment affirmed.
All concurring.
. Section 602.3(A)(1) lists as a permitted use a “[o]ne-family dwelling in detached building.”

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4946297. Public record. Not legal advice.