Cited by

Opinions in New Hampshire that cite Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Board of Adjustment, 922 A.2d 672.

17 citing documents.

Seabrook Onestop, Inc. & a. v. Town of Seabrook & a. N.H. 2021
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Exeter Area Conservancy v. Town of Exeter N.H. 2020
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Jeremiah J. O'Sullivan & a. v. Town of North Hampton N.H. 2019
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
David F. Dietz & a. v. Town of Tuftonboro 201 A.3d 65 N.H. 2019
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 310 (2007) (“To the extent this ruling means the superior court reversed the ZBA’s decision because it found the decision lacked findings, the ruling constitutes error.”); Thomas v. Town of Hooksett, 153 N.H. 717, 724 (2006).
Rochester City Council v. Rochester Zoning Board of Adjustment 194 A.3d 472 N.H. 2018
The ZBA’s failure to explicitly make a finding regarding unnecessary hardship was not an error: “[a]lthough disclosure of specific findings of fact by a board of adjustment may often facilitate judicial review, the absence of findings, at least where there is no request therefor, is not in and of itself error.” Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Appeal of Health Trust, Inc. N.H. 2018
“The scope of remand is limited by the nature of the error or issue identified.” Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Charles Cote & a. v. Town of Danville N.H. 2017
“The party seeking to set aside the ZBA decision in the superior court bears the burden of proof.” Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Daryal Klitz & a. v. Town of Pittsfield N.H. 2015
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 310 (2007) (“Although disclosure of specific findings of fact by a board of adjustment may often facilitate judicial review, the absence of findings, at least where there is no request therefor, is not in and of itself error.”).
Blazingstar Funding, LLC v. Dimitrius Wilson & a. N.H. 2015
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 311-12 (2007) (upholding trial court’s decision to vacate zoning board decision and remand for the board to clarify its decision); In the Matter of Gordon and Gordon, 147 N.H. 693, 700 (2002) (directing trial court on remand to make specific findings to facilitate appellate review).
Bartlett v. City of Manchester 62 A.3d 855 N.H. 2013
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 311 (2007) (trial court may remand to the ZBA for clarification).
1808 Corp. v. Town of New Ipswich 20 A.3d 984 N.H. 2011
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Board of Adjustment 159 N.H. 725 N.H. 2010
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Kalil v. TOWN OF DUMMER 992 A.2d 725 N.H. 2010
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Guy v. Town of Temple 956 A.2d 272 N.H. 2008
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 310-11 (2007) (finding remand to the ZBA appropriate where the superior court “intended to vacate and remand the matter because it found the text of the [ZBA] decision unclear”), let alone the character, nature, scope or effect on the surrounding neighborhood of the purported expansion, see Wickson, 146 N.H. at 331
Daniels v. Town of Londonderry 953 A.2d 406 N.H. 2008
Kalil v. Town of Dummer Zoning Bd.
Naser v. Town of Deering Zoning Board of Adjustment 157 N.H. 322 N.H. 2008
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 309 (2007) (citations omitted).
Naser v. TOWN OF DEERING ZON. BD. OF ADJ. 950 A.2d 157 N.H. 2008
of Adjustment, 155 N.H. 307, 309, 922 A.2d 672 (2007) (citations omitted).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by