Rando v. Town of North Attleboro
Massachusetts Court of Appeals
44 Mass. App. Ct. 603 (1998)
- Written by Laura Julien, JD
Facts
In October 1993, the town of North Attleboro, Massachusetts (North Attleboro) (defendant) rezoned approximately 37 acres of land from residential to commercial. Anthony Rando (plaintiff) was a resident of North Attleboro. The rezoning occurred after the required two-thirds of North Attleboro’s alderman voted in favor of the proposition and following due notice and approval in accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts law. The rezoning occurred following negotiations with Alfred Carpionato, a land developer, whereby Carpionato agreed to certain mitigation efforts such as the establishment of a no-build buffer zone and the establishment of a mitigation fund whereby Carpionato paid $260,000 to North Attleboro and between $400,000 and $450,000 to the Massachusetts Highway Department for the entities to use to address impacts caused by the development of the 37-acre property. The $260,000 paid to North Attleboro was calculated on the basis of $1 per square foot of retail space that would be available. Rando filed suit against North Attleboro, alleging that the rezoning, restrictive covenants, deed restrictions, and mitigation covenants constituted illegal contract zoning and were therefore invalid. The trial court found in favor of North Attleboro and upheld the rezoning action. Rando then filed an appeal.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Perretta, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
