- Our Blog
Today the Appeals Court decided Gund v. Planning Board of Cambridge. That case concerns the former location of the Middlesex Superior Court, an asbestos-filled, anomalous sky-scraper near Lechmere in Cambridge. The building, which does not comply with zoning, has been sold to a developer. At issue was whether the court house is a preexisting, nonconforming structure under G.L. c.
On June 29, 2017, the First Circuit Court of Appeals decided Steinmetz v. Coyle Caron, Inc. That case, which has its roots in the mundane desire of a couple to build a new home on their land in Cohasset, gave rise to some interesting and complicated constitutional questions. The Steinmetzes needed approval from the local Conservation Commission for their project.
Earlier this week the Appeals Court decided that a tenant has the burden of proving that it properly exercised its option to terminate a written lease. The commercial lease in Patriot Power, LLC v. New Rounder, LLC, provided that it would renew automatically each year unless one of the parties timely notified the other that it wished to exercise a termination option in the lease.
Yesterday the Appeals Court upheld a variance decision by our former colleague, Land Court Justice Robert Foster. In that case, Furlong v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Salem, Furlong challenged a variance granted to the abutting Brewer Hawthorne Cove Marina in Salem. The variance permitted the Marina to construct a new building outside of the setback requirements of the local z ...
A Massachusetts appellate court has ruled for the first time that new land which accretes to registered waterfront land is treated as registered land automatically, without the registered landowner filing additional proceedings. In Brown v. Kalicki, decided earlier this week, neighbors sought to establish an easement by prescription to use for recreational purposes a beach ar ...
On June 17, 2016, the Supreme Judicial Court decided an interesting zoning case concerning whether the holder of a beach access easement has standing to challenge a zoning determination affecting the beach parcel. The case is Picard v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Westminster. As all followers of Massachusetts zoning know, the standing of a plaintiff to challenge a zoning decis ...
The Massachusetts Legislature and Governor Baker have taken a much needed step to limit further problems resulting from the Ibanez decision and its progeny. Those cases made clear that a foreclosure by a party that did not yet hold an assignment of the mortgage failed to convey good title. As a result, many third party buyers who had purchased foreclosed property before the Ib ...
In its decision earlier this year in U.S. Bank Natl. Assn. v. Schumacher (pdf), the Supreme Judicial Court addressed the impact of a failure to comply with requirements for providing notice of the mortgagor’s right to cure a default pursuant to M.G.L. c. 244, § 35A (our post on Schumacher is here). The recent Appeals Court case of Haskins v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.
In the last few weeks the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) decided two more cases dealing with the effects of botched foreclosure sales. The more important decision is U.S. Bank National Association v. Schumacher (pdf). Schumacher arises from M.G.L. c. 244, §35A, which the Legislature enacted in 2007 in response to the foreclosure crisis.