McDonald v. Town of Effingham Zoning Board of Adjustment

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court addresses whether a zoning applicant must file a second motion for rehearing when the zoning board raises a new dispositive ground while denying the initial rehearing request. The court holds that no second motion for rehearing is required to preserve challenges to new issues, findings, or rulings first raised in the denial order, because requiring one would produce an impermissible bifurcated appeal process. The court reverses the dismissal of the applicant’s appeal and related claims and remands for further proceedings.

Holdings

1. When a zoning board of adjustment denies a motion for rehearing, the aggrieved party need not file a second motion for rehearing to preserve for appeal any new issues, findings, or rulings first raised by the board in the denial order.
2. In an appeal involving new issues, findings, or rulings first raised in a ZBA's denial of rehearing, the superior court may, in its discretion, stay the matter and remand to the ZBA for further hearing as necessary.

Questions Presented

1. Whether an applicant must file a second motion for rehearing before appealing new findings or rulings first raised by a zoning board of adjustment in an order denying the applicant's initial motion for rehearing.
2. Whether the failure to file a second motion for rehearing forecloses related federal and state due-process claims.
3. Whether the failure to file a second motion for rehearing forecloses a claim for damages based on an alleged regulatory taking.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded