From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zeitler v. Town of Hinsdale

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Feb 17, 1977
359 N.E.2d 1315 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977)

Opinion

February 17, 1977.

The case was submitted on briefs.

Stephen W. Silverman for the plaintiffs.

Ronald E. Oliveira David O. Burbank for the defendants.


At a town meeting held on November 22, 1971, the defendant town voted to appropriate $1,276,000 for the construction of "interceptor and lateral sewers" and to raise that amount by borrowing. The plaintiffs, eleven taxable inhabitants of the town, entered the present action in the Superior Court on March 1, 1974, seeking to vitiate that vote, alleging that certain procedural errors occurred during its passage. The judge found that the plaintiffs were guilty of laches and ordered that the bill be dismissed. On June 20, 1974, the plaintiffs appealed from the decree entered pursuant to that order. Laches is a question of fact. Provident Co-op. Bank v. James Talcott, Inc. 358 Mass. 180, 187 (1970). That is true in actions such as the present one which are brought by taxpayers under G.L.c. 40, § 53. See Fuller v. Melrose, 1 Allen 166 (1861); Tash v. Adams, 10 Cush. 252, 253-254 (1852); Conners v. Lowell, 246 Mass. 279, 284-285 (1923). The judge's finding was warranted on the pleadings and on the testimony before him. As the outcome of this case would not be changed, we do not pass upon the remaining claims of error.

Decree affirmed.


Summaries of

Zeitler v. Town of Hinsdale

Appeals Court of Massachusetts
Feb 17, 1977
359 N.E.2d 1315 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977)
Case details for

Zeitler v. Town of Hinsdale

Case Details

Full title:DOROTHY M. ZEITLER others vs. TOWN OF HINSDALE others

Court:Appeals Court of Massachusetts

Date published: Feb 17, 1977

Citations

359 N.E.2d 1315 (Mass. App. Ct. 1977)
359 N.E.2d 1315

Citing Cases

Winkler v. W. Va. School Bldg. Authority

Such authority is based upon the doctrine of laches. See, e.g., Solomon v. North Shore Sanitary Dist., 48…

Seideman v. City of Newton

This issue has not been raised by the parties, and we reserve opinion on the matter until it is properly…