Case law

Prime v. Zoning Board of Appeals

42 Mass. App. Ct. 796 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jun 9, 1997

The judge concluded, citing Cumberland Farms of Conn., Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Appeal of N. Attleborough, 359 Mass. 68, 74-75 (1971), and Kirker v. Board of Appeals of Raynham, 33 Mass. App. … Compare Goddard v. Board of Appeals of Concord, 13 Mass. App. Ct. 1001 (1982) (protection of ground water is a valid public interest).

Dube v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

50 Mass. App. Ct. 21 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Aug 21, 2000

Co. v. Department of Envtl. Protection, 429 Mass. 798, 803 (1999), quoting from King v. Viscoloid Co., 219 Mass. 420, 425 (1914). … Dartt v. Browning-Ferris Indus., Inc. (Mass.), 427 Mass. 1, 9 (1998).

Norfolk County Retirement Board v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

15 Mass. App. Ct. 683 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 22, 1983

See Selectmen of Topsfield v. State Racing Commn., 324 Mass. 309, 312-313 (1949); Moynihan v. Arlington, 6 Mass. App. Ct. 960 (1978). … Ry. v. Massachusetts Bay Transp. Authy., 350 Mass. 340, 343 (1966). It is unnecessary to look beyond the pertinent language of § 100, quoted above, to determine its meaning. See Commonwealth v.

Tabroff v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

69 Mass. App. Ct. 131 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · May 23, 2007

The retirement board of Peabody (board) appeals from a judgment entered in the Superior Court in favor of Ronald Tabroff. … Retirement Bd. of Taunton v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 56 Mass. App. Ct. 914, 915 (2002). See Falmouth v. Civil Service Commn., 447 Mass. 814, 821 (2006), quoting from Nuclear Metals, Inc. v.

Hunter v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

80 Mass. App. Ct. 257 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Aug 29, 2011

He also argues that because the Essex County retirement board (county board) at one point classified him in Group 4, the State Board of Retirement (State board) was precluded by G. … See also Hollstein v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 47 Mass. App. Ct. 109, 110-112 (1999) (discussing authority of Boston retirement board to correct errors in retirement calculations). Judgment affirmed.

Shoolman v. Health Facilities Appeals Board

404 Mass. 33 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Feb 7, 1989

Health, 379 Mass. 70, 85 (1979), and the board’s decision must stand unless it was arbitrary or capricious. We review the board’s decision as though it were reached on the merits without an evidentiary hearing. Howe v. … Albert v. Municipal Court of the City of Boston, 388 Mass. 491, 493 (1983). See Seagram Distillers Co. v. Alcoholic Beverages Control Comm’n, 401 Mass. 713, 724 (1988); Gurry v. Board of Pub.

Cataldo v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

343 Mass. 312 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Dec 8, 1961

See McCarthy v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 342 Mass. 45 . … McCarthy v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., 342 Mass. 45, 47 .

Fairbairn v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

54 Mass. App. Ct. 353 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 1, 2002

See Noone v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd., supra at 763 n.11. Discussion. Noone v. … [retirement] board lacks medical information that, with nonmedical facts presented to the board, provides the basis for the decision of the [retirement] board on the question of causation” (emphasis in original).

Fifield v. Board of Zoning Appeal

450 Mass. 1001 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 5, 2007

Andover v. State Fin. … Cappuccio v.

Doe v. Sex Offender Registry Board

28 Mass. L. Rptr. 159 · Massachusetts Superior Court · Mar 22, 2011

Auth. v. … See Gurry v. Board of Pub.

Hayes Pump & Machinery Co. v. Pitman & Brown Co.

331 Mass. 240 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Mar 19, 1954

This is a bill in equity, filed April 6, 1950, by a creditor of the defendant Pitman & Brown Company, hereinafter called Pitman, to obtain the benefit of security under G. L. (Ter. … The defendants contend that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover anything, because it intentionally departed from the contract, citing Andre v.

Wallerstein v. Board of Bar Examiners

414 Mass. 1008 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Apr 5, 1993

Wallerstein, a member of the Massachusetts bar, requested the defendant, Board of Bar Examiners (board), to disclose to him his score in the multistate bar examination. The board refused. … Attorney Gen. v. Kenco Optics, Inc., 369 Mass. 412, 418 (1976). However, action on a motion to dismiss under rule 12 (b) (6) does not relate to the merits. Smith v. Massimiano, ante 81, 85 (1993).

Seiler v. Board of Sewer Commissioners

353 Mass. 452 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Jan 3, 1968

of the respondent Board, the pollution in Hingham Harbor caused by such raw sewage had to be brought to an end. … They cite Ayer v. Mayor & Aldermen of Somerville, 143 Mass. 585 , in support of this proposition.

Donnelly v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

15 Mass. App. Ct. 19 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Dec 13, 1982

Co. v. Boston, 369 Mass. 542, 546 (1976), quoted in Nantucket Conservation Foundation, Inc. v. Russell Management, Inc., 380 Mass. at 214 . … In Brewer v. Brewer, 329 Mass. 205 (1952), decided under a prior version of G.

Chase v. PLANNING BOARD OF WATERTOWN

4 Mass. App. Ct. 430 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jul 7, 1976

L. c. 30A, § 14, because the planning board of Watertown is a local body and is not an “agency” for purposes of the State Administrative Procedure Act, G. L. c. 30A. See Dixie’s Bar Inc. v. … Boston Licensing Bd. 357 Mass. 699 , *433 702 (1970); Sherman v. Rent Control Bd. of Brookline, 367 Mass. 1, 7-8 (1975). Therefore, review of the board’s decision cannot be obtained under G. L. c. 30A, § 14.

Stampfl v. Zoning Board of Appeals

33 Mass. App. Ct. 354 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Sep 30, 1992

The Stampfls and Norwood’s zoning board of appeals (board) appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court which, as we interpret it, requires the Stampfls, who *355 use the northerly portion of their lot for open storage of … The Stampfls cite Bellows Farms, Inc. v. Building Inspector of Acton, 364 Mass. 253 (1973), which interpreted the predecessor statute to G.

Tofias v. Energy Facilities Siting Board

435 Mass. 340 · Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · Nov 14, 2001

Save the Bay, Inc. v. Department of Pub. Utils., 366 Mass. 667, 673 (1975). See Cablevision Sys. Corp. v. Department of Telecommunications & Energy, 428 Mass. 436, 437 (1998); Newton v. Department of Pub. … Corp. v. Department of Telecommunications & Energy, supra at 439 (agency has “broad discretion” to deny intervention); KES Brockton, Inc. v. Department of Pub.

Karet v. Zoning Board of Appeals

27 Mass. App. Ct. 439 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jun 7, 1989

Warren v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Amherst, 383 Mass. 1, 11 (1981). Guiragossian v. Board of Appeals of Watertown, 21 Mass. App. Ct. 111, 116 (1985). DiCicco v. Berwick, ante 312 (1989). … Raia v. Board of Appeals of North Reading, 4 Mass. App. Ct. 318, 322 (1976), and cases cited. Arrigo v. Planning Bd. of Franklin, 12 Mass. App. Ct. 802, 803-804 (1981). Gordon v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of Lee, 22 Mass.

Gaw v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Board

4 Mass. App. Ct. 250 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Apr 16, 1976

Our examination of § 3 (2) (g) in accordance with standard principles of statutory construction (see Board of Education v. Assessor of Worcester, 368 Mass. 511, 513 [1975], and cases cited; Prudential Ins. Co. v. … The appeal board answered that question in the negative. To the extent that its answer was a finding of fact, it was supported by substantial evidence *257 and must stand. Compare Maddocks v.

Rhodes v. Board of State Examiners

4 Mass. App. Ct. 767 · Massachusetts Appeals Court · Jan 9, 1976

[its] function of appellate review.’ ” Andrade v. Contributory Retirement Appeal Bd. 350 Mass. 447, 449 (1966). Hamilton v. Department of Pub. Util. 346 Mass. 130, 137 (1963). … [the board] applied correct principles of law to the facts found by it” (School Comm. of Chicopee v. Massachusetts Comm. Against Discrimination, 361 Mass. 352, 355 [1972], citing New York Cent. R.R. v.