Article 97 of the Amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution, approved by the voters in 1972, established a right to a clean environment including its natural, scenic, historical, and aesthetic qualities for the citizens of the Commonwealth.
Firm Senior Partner Gregor I. McGregor has updated his popular PowerPoint covering environmental law from "A to Z." This means it surveys Massachusetts state and local environmental laws, regulations, bylaws and ordinances, as well as related federal laws and legal doctrines, from Air Pollution to Zoning and everything in between!
Firm founder and senior partner Gregor I. McGregor will present at this year's American Bar Association (ABA) annual meeting in Denver, August 3-5, a survey of 100 years of the Regulatory Taking Doctrine since the seminal court case Pennsylvania Coal v. Mahon in 1922.
The Massachusetts Department of Environment Protection (“MassDEP”) has amended its Septic System (“Title 5”) Regulations (310 CMR 15.000) and its Watershed Permit Regulations (314 CMR 21.00).
On May 25 the United States Supreme Court, ruling in the case of Sackett v. EPA, sharply limited the scope of protection for the nation’s waters under the federal Clean Water Act (CWA). The Court redefined the CWA’s coverage of “waters of the United States” which had been hotly contested since the Court’s previous decision on point and EPA’s regulatory expansion of what adjacent wetlands are included.
Article 97 of the Amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution, approved by the voters in 1972, established a right to a clean environment including its natural, scenic, historical, and aesthetic qualities for the citizens of the Commonwealth.
For anyone contemplating using a right-of-way to reach a Great Pond in Massachusetts, two must-read Appeals Court decisions are Kubic v. Audette, 98 Mass. 289 (2020) (Kubic I) and Kubic v. Audette, 102 Mass. App. Ct. 228 (2023) (Kubic II). They explain the principle of ownership of accreted land bordering a Great Pond, the rights and limits of access to a Great Pond, the tests for overburdening of an easement, and the proper interpretation of easements.
Massachusetts Continuing Legal Education (MCLE) again will host its annual conference on Environmental, Land Use & Energy Law, once again co-chaired by the principal of our firm, Gregor I. McGregor, Esq. This is the 24th year of this gathering of the leading specialists in this field of law.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in its decision in the case of Haven Center, Inc. v. Town of Bourne, 490 Mass. 364 (2022), upheld as valid the Town of Bourne’s general bylaw ban on recreational marijuana establishments.
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued an important decision in the case of Valentin v. Town of Natick et al., 2022 WL 4481412 (D. Mass. Sept. 27, 2022). This federal court litigation arose from the denial of an application for a permit to develop a condominium project that included affordable housing in Natick, Massachusetts.
Live Webcast
Date: February 7, 2023
Time: 9:30 AM
Learn about the substantive laws that govern your client's applications, such as the: Wetlands Protection Act and municipal bylaws; Home Rule principles and preemption; Open Meeting Law rules (for live, remote, and hybrid); and related federal and state permits and licenses.
Firm founder and senior partner Gregor I. McGregor is honored to present as a webinar open to all REBA members his updated PowerPoint on the United State Supreme Court decisions on Regulatory Takings. He also is covering the leading cases from the high courts of states in the last couple of years.
Current and prospective property owners who may wish to be able to invoke certain legal defenses to liability under the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) should be aware that the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has amended its regulations governing such defenses.
In January 2021, the Zoning Act, G.L. c. 40A, was amended to give the trial court judge discretion to require a plaintiff appealing a special permit, variance, or site plan decision to post a bond of up to $50,000 “to secure the payment of costs if the court finds that the harm to the defendant or to the public interest resulting from delays caused by the appeal outweighs the financial burden of the surety or cash bond on the plaintiffs.”
The law firm of McGregor Legere & Stevens, PC is very pleased to announce the addition of Caroline Smith as an Associate Attorney. Welcome to the firm, Caroline!
The United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) has proposed to designate Perfluorooctanoic Acid (PFOA) and Perfluorooctanesulfonic Acid (PFOS) as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). This is the federal Superfund law. Collectively these chemicals are known as “PFAS.”
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) granted direct appellate review and decided on July 12, 2022, the case of Katherine Armstrong et al v. Secretary of Energy and Environmental Affairs et al, 490 Mass. 243 (2022), and a consolidated case brought by the Conservation Law Foundation of New England, Inc. (CLF) and others.
Can citizen plaintiffs in federal court sue the same violator for the same water pollution violation against which the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) or state agency is taking or has taken administrative enforcement?
An interesting, important and relatively rare decision from the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court is about regulatory taking (yes, Virginia, there is a valid claim for taking) and impairment of contract (no, sorry, there is no valid claim).
In the case of Shurtleff v. City of Boston, 596 US ___ (May 2, 2022), the U.S. Supreme Court held that the City of Boston’s flag-raising program did not constitute government speech. Consequently, the City’s refusal to allow the petitioners to fly their flag because of its religious viewpoint violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment to the US Constitution. Let’s see how this regulatory analysis works.
The City of Austin, Texas regulates signs that advertise things not located on the same premises as the sign, and signs directing readers to offsite locations, all known as “off-premises signs.” The City’s sign code prohibited construction of new off-premises signs, but gave existing signs vested rights and treated on-premises signs liberally.
The Appeals Court in 2016 had taught the lesson well, but many boards, attorneys and clients apparently missed that class, so the Supreme Judicial Court has instructed us again, this time in a masterclass.
Calculate When Your Permits Expire If Issued Before or During the Covid Emergency: 462 Extra Days?
What the Lifting of the COVID-19 State of Emergency in Massachusetts Will Mean for Boards and Commissions
Legislature Revises Local and Regional Permitting Deadlines as COVID-19 Pandemic Continues
MassDEP and EPA Guidance on Waste Site Cleanups and Compliance during COVID-19 Emergency: Some Flexibility but Important Deadlines and On-Site Obligations Still Apply
Across the spectrum of environmental law we offer advice and representation
with practical, results-oriented lawyering.