Sydney Hanlon

The case concerned whether an eminent domain taking of part of a larger parcel in 1971 for school purposes eliminated the remaining lot's (lot 38) grandfathered exemption from a one-acre minimum lot size requirement under the Andover zoning by-law and G.L. c. 40A, §6, fourth par. The developer plaintiff acquired the now-undersized, vacant lot and was denied a building permit, variance, and special permit by the board of appeals, a decision upheld by the Land Court on summary judgment. The Appeals Court affirmed, holding that the taking created a distinct new parcel that was not entitled to the original parcel's pre-1971 grandfather protection, as the lot as it existed after the taking did not qualify under the statute's requirements for recorded instruments predating the zoning change. The decision rested on the principle that statutory grandfathering protects only the specific pre-taking configuration and does not automatically transfer to the remainder after eminent domain alters the parcel's boundaries and ownership status.

propertybusiness & regulatory

The case involved a defendant convicted by a jury of operating a motor vehicle under the influence of alcohol after being found intoxicated while driving. The defendant claimed error in the jury instructions regarding involuntary intoxication from mixing prescription medication with alcohol without prior knowledge of the interaction. The court affirmed the conviction, holding that the instructions were correct in requiring acquittal only if intoxication was caused solely by the medication, and that the prosecution needed only to prove alcohol was one contributing cause of her impaired driving ability. The reasoning emphasized that existing precedents on concurrent causes from alcohol and other substances apply, and the defendant did not establish a basis for a different instruction on involuntary intoxication from prescription drugs.

criminal law