# Windsor v. PLANNING BOARD OF WAYLAND

> Massachusetts Appeals Court · December 9, 1988 · 26 Mass. App. Ct. 650

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9716923

## Case

- **Full name:** Robert Windsor & Another vs. Planning Board of Wayland (And a Companion Case)
- **Court:** Massachusetts Appeals Court
- **Decided:** December 9, 1988
- **Citations:** 26 Mass. App. Ct. 650; 531 N.E.2d 272
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Fine
- **Judges:** Fine, Perretta, Kaplan, Fíne
- **Cited by:** 11 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/9716923

## Opinion text

Fine, J.
(dissenting). Concerning section 2 of the opinion, I cannot see the logic of giving effect to a constructive grant when the applicant for subdivision approval is willing to accept the conditions set forth in a less favorable late-filed written decision granting the application, and no one has changed his position in the interim in good faith reliance on the constructive *660 grant. None of the cases cited to support the majority view involved a situation comparable to the present one. In the present situation, it is the constructive grant, rather than the later-filed decision, that should be regarded as a nullity. The public interest would be better served in general by having effect given to conditions imposed upon applicants in reasoned decisions and acceptable to them than to approvals based on official nonaction. It is difficult to see how the goals of orderliness of procedure and reliability of the public record would be adversely affected by giving effect, in such circumstances, to the actual decision. A written decision with conditions accepted by the applicant would appear in the public record. And any aggrieved party would have the right to appeal from the board’s actual decision. In this case the plaintiff, having taken such an appeal, was not misled by anything in the public record.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9716923. Public record. Not legal advice.