SAM MEDINA vs. ANTHONY EONAS, STEPHEN BERNARD, RICHARD C. FRANCIS, KENNETH GALLIGAN and SUSAN NICASTRO, members of THE CITY OF BROCKTON ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS

Plaintiff filed his unverified Complaint on February 16, 2012, pursuant to G. L. c. 40A, § 17, appealing a decision of Defendant City of Brockton Zoning Board of Appeals (the "ZBA"), which 1) denied Plaintiff's appeal of a decision of the Building Inspector of the City of Brockton (the "Building Inspector") which held that property owned by Plaintiff was not a buildable lot, and 2) denied Plaintiff's application for a variance. The ZBA filed its Answer on February 27, 2012. A case management conference was held on April 9, 2012.

Plaintiff filed his Motion for Summary Judgment on April 4, 2012, together with supporting memorandum, Statement of Material Facts, and a Motion to Strike Answer. On August 17, 2012, the ZBA filed its Opposition and Cross Motion for Summary Judgment, together with supporting memorandum, Statement of Additional Undisputed Facts, and Appendix. Plaintiff filed his Reply Memorandum on September 17, 2012, together with Affidavits of James Casieri (Brockton Superintendent of Buildings), John F. Johnson (former member of Brockton City Council), Carl Landerholm (former Brockton Superintendent of Buildings), John Dorgan (former Brockton Superintendent of Buildings), and David Tonis (former Brockton Superintendent of Buildings). A hearing was held on all Motions on September 24, 2012, and the matter was taken under advisement. A decision of today's date has been issued (the "Decision"). In accordance with the Decision, it is hereby:

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion to Strike the Answer is DENIED.

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Lot 12 on a plan of land titled "Plan of House Lots in Brockton, Mass. For Sale by H. T. Anglim" and recorded with the Plymouth County Registry of Deeds on March 28, 1899 at Plan Book 1, Page 200, is a pre-existing nonconforming lot pursuant to Section 27-12 of the City of Brockton Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"), and that the decision of the ZBA interpreting the provisions of Section 27-12 of the Ordinance exceeded its authority.

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby ALLOWED and the ZBA's Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED.

So ordered.

By the court. (Sands, J.)