New England Legal Foundation
  • Home
  • About
    • Mission & History
    • Annual Reports
    • Board of Directors
    • State Advisory Councils >
      • Connecticut
      • Maine
      • Massachusetts
      • New Hampshire
      • Rhode Island
      • Vermont
    • Trustees
    • Members
    • Staff
    • Job & Internship Opportunities
  • News & Events
  • Docket
  • Briefs
  • Donate
  • Contact

Chandler v. County Comm’rs of Nantucket

9/25/2002

 
The Validity of Eminent Domain Process Taking of Unpaved Roads as “Highways” to Allow Public Beach Access and Land Conservation

In 2000 the Nantucket County Commissioners voted to take sixteen platted, unimproved private roads as public highways without any intention to pave or improve the roadways. Their stated purpose was to provide public beach access and to preserve open space.  Some of the roads are nonexistent “paper” ways; some parallel the coastline; and others run perpendicular to the coastline, across the beach, and into the ocean.  The highway takings process provides considerable procedural advantages over the process for taking land for park and conservation purposes. It is quicker, has fewer preliminary administrative requirements, and requires a lower vote in town meeting.  The affected property owners sued the County, asserting that the meaning of “highway” does not extend to roads, paper or otherwise, that a county does not intend to improve for vehicular access.  The County argued that the highway statute granted it broad discretionary power to decide the necessity and extent of a highway taking.  

Supporting the property owners, NELF argued that a county could not “end run” the open space eminent domain statutes, which provide greater protection for property owners, by using a highway eminent domain statute designed for a different purpose and containing different safeguards. Agreeing with NELF’s position, the SJC ruled in favor of the property owners, holding that the highway statute authorizes takings solely to facilitate safe and convenient travel through the construction of roadways or the improvement or repair of existing roadways.  Since the Commissioners’ objective was plainly not to construct or improve any roadway, the Court concluded that their action was invalid and vacated the takings. 


Comments are closed.

    The Docket

    To obtain a copy of any of NELF's briefs, contact us at info@nelfonline.org.

    Categories

    All
    1st Circuit Court Of Appeals
    2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    3rd Circuit Court Of Appeals
    Business Litigation Session
    CT
    CT Superior Court
    CT Supreme Court
    Employer Employee Relationships
    February 2018
    February 2019
    Government Regulation/Administration Of Justice
    MA
    MA Appeals Court
    MA Division Of Administrative Law Appeals
    March 2015
    MA Superior Court
    MA Supreme Judicial Court
    MA US District Court
    ME
    ME Supreme Judicial Court
    NH
    NH Supreme Court
    Property Rights
    RI
    RI Supreme Court
    SCOTUS
    United States Supreme Court
    US Court Of Appeals Federal Circuit
    US District Court ME
    VT
    VT Supreme Court

    RSS Feed

    Archives

    August 2020
    June 2020
    January 2020
    June 2019
    April 2019
    October 2018
    June 2018
    February 2018
    October 2017
    October 2016
    June 2016
    February 2016
    October 2015
    June 2015
    March 2015
    October 2014
    June 2014
    February 2014
    October 2013
    June 2013
    February 2013
    October 2012
    June 2012
    February 2012
    October 2011
    June 2011
    February 2011
    October 2010
    June 2010
    February 2010
    October 2009
    February 2009
    October 2008
    June 2008
    February 2008
    October 2007
    June 2007
    October 2006
    June 2006
    February 2006
    October 2005
    June 2005
    February 2005
    October 2004
    June 2004
    February 2004
    October 2003
    May 2003
    February 2003
    September 2002
    May 2002
    February 2002
    May 2001