Town of Weare v. Stone
| Decision Date | 31 January 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 6736,6736 |
| Citation | 114 N.H. 80,314 A.2d 638 |
| Parties | TOWN OF WEARE v. Roland J. STONE et al. |
| Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Hatfield & Howard and Lloyd N. Henderson, Hillsboro, for plaintiff.
Maynard, Dunn & Phillips, Concord, for defendants filed no brief.
By this petition for injunctive relief the town of Weare seeks to compel the removal of a mobile home maintained in the town by the defendants contrary to the provisions of a town bylaw. The town's request for a temporary injunction was denied but the defendants were ordered to make no changes in the trailer or its site pending transfer to this court. All questions of law raised by the pleadings and by the agreed statement of facts were reserved and transferred by the Superior Court, King, J.
The Weare mobile home bylaw, enacted by the 1969 annual town meeting, provides in pertinent part: Other provisions authorize the selectmen to grant exceptions, after public hearing.
The selectmen, award of defendants' plans for moving a mobile home into the town, sent a letter dated November 20, 1972, to defendant Roland Stone informing him of this ordinance and enclosing a copy thereof. On or about December 5 Roland sent a letter to the selectment requesting permission to place a mobile home on land of defendants Earl and Theresa Stone in Weare. Without waiting for a response, defendants on or about December 7 installed the trailer in the location requested. On December 13 the town brought the present action.
In the absence of a brief or oral argument for the defendants, their contentions must be gathered from the pleadings and the agreed statement of facts. This court has repeatedly held that '(a) town may properly seek to regulate and restrict the location of mobile homes'. Londonderry v. Faucher, 112 N.H. 454, 456, 299 A.2d 581, 583 (1972); New Boston v. Coombs, 111 N.H. 359, 284 A.2d 920 (1971); Greenland v. Hussey, 110 N.H. 269, 266 A.2d 122 (1970). Such regulation has been upheld as an exercise of the police power provisions of RSA 31:39 (Supp.1972). New Boston v. Coombs, supra. "The most common and the most widely accepted type of regulation of residential trailers is that which confines them to established trailer parks or camps". Londonderry v. Faucher, supra, 112 N.H. at 456, 299 A.2d at 583, quoting 58 Am.Jur. Zoni...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Concord v. Tompkins
...estoppel for failure to enforce a regulation when "conscious intentional discrimination in enforcement is alleged." Weare v. Stone, 114 N.H. 80, 82, 314 A.2d 638, 639 (1974). When no government official with authority to bind the government exists, the party asserting estoppel cannot rely o......
-
Beck v. Town of Raymond
...an ordinance prohibiting the establishment of additional mobile home parks in town where three already existed); Town of Weare v. Stone, 114 N.H. 80, 314 A.2d 638 (1974) (upheld an ordinance locating mobile homes within duly licensed mobile home parks); Riverview Park, Inc. v. Town of Hinsd......
-
Alexander v. Town of Hampstead, 86-237
...show that the selective enforcement of the ordinance against him was a "conscious intentional discrimination." See Weare v. Stone, 114 N.H. 80, 82, 314 A.2d 638, 639 (1974); see also Yick Wo v. Hopkins, 118 U.S. 356, 6 S.Ct. 1064, 30 L.Ed. 220 (1886). Additionally, it is conceivable that a ......
-
Rye Beach Village Dist. v. Beaudoin
...548, 254 A.2d 898 (1969); Building Comm'r v. C & H Co., 319 Mass. 273, 283, 65 N.E.2d 537, 543 (1946); see Town of Weare v. Stone, 114 N.H. --, 314 A.2d 638 (Jan. 31, 1974); State v. Hutchins, 79 N.H. 132, 105 A. 519 Nor will estoppel arise out of unauthorized acts or statements of a public......