Opinion

Sorenti v. Board of Appeals of Wellesley

  • 345 Mass. 348
  • 187 N.E.2d 499
  • 96 A.L.R. 2d 1361
  • 1963 Mass. LEXIS 665
Court
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
Filed
Jan 17, 1963
Status
Published
Author
Cuttee
On the bench
Wilkins, Spalding, Whittemorb, Cutter, Kirk, Spiegel
Cited by
27 cases
Authority
More cited than 0.3%

affirming denial of building permit; no exemption even when plaintiff previously obtained building permit and some work had already been done

How later courts described this case

  • affirming denial of building permit; no exemption even when plaintiff previously obtained building permit and some work had already been done
  • transfer of adjacent lot to “straw” purchaser one day before zoning bylaw change

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

*354 Cuttee, J.

(concurring). I concur but wish to emphasize that the plaintiffs have not established on this record that the amended by-law wholly precludes Sorenti from all residential or other reasonable use of lot 3. The record shows that Sorenti, when he conveyed away lot 2, granted an easement over the 9.9 foot strip which was part of lot 3 and reserved an easement over the 9.9 foot strip of lot 2, in each case for road or street purposes. Whether some appropriate use or development of the land in the light of these easements could affect Sorenti’s position under the amended by-law does not appear. Accordingly, there is no occasion to consider the plaintiffs’ contention that the case is governed by decisions such as Gem Properties, Inc. v. Board of Appeals of Milton, 341 Mass. 99,104-106 .

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.