Bouchard v. Ramos
Bouchard v. Ramos
Opinion of the Court
This bill in equity under G. L. c. 40A, § 21, as amended, by way of an appeal from a decision of the board of appeals of New Bedford granting a variance to the defendants Ramos was before us in 346 Mass. 423. At that time the rescript in its entirety provided: ‘‘ The decree is reversed. A final decree is to be entered in the Superior Court adjudging that the decision exceeded the authority of the board and is annulled” (page 426). Thereafter there was entered a final decree after rescript which not only contained the foregoing but also ordered the defendant city to
The decree did not conform to the rescript. Bourbeau v. Whittaker, 265 Mass. 396, 399. Crowley v. Holdsworth, 267 Mass. 13,16. Carilli v. Eersey, 303 Mass. 82, 85. Galvin v. Bay State Harness Horse Racing & Breeding Assn. Inc. 343 Mass. 520, 522. The decree also was repugnant to G. L. c. 40A, § 21 (as amended through St. 1960, c. 365), which provides that no costs shall be awarded (1) against the board unless it appear that the board “acted with gross negligence, in bad faith or with malice”; or (2) against the party appealing from the decision unless it appear that there was bad faith or malice in making the appeal.
The final decree is to be modified by striking the provision as to costs, and, as so modified, it is affirmed.
So ordered.
Reference
- Full Case Name
- Francois L. Bouchard & others v. Caroline Ramos & others
- Status
- Published