Home KENNETH B. KROHN, Ph.D., J.D., Plaintiff v. THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, THE BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL OF THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, and SLATER W. ANDERSON, ALEXANDER CONSTANTINE, JANET O. GREEN, ALISON HAMMER, ANDREA A. HICKEY, JIM MONTVERDE, BRENDAN SULLIVAN and LAURA A. WERNICK, as they are members of the BOARD OF ZONING APPEAL OF THE CITY OF CAMBRIDGE, Defendants and 12 ARNOLD CIRCLE, LLC, Rule 19 Party

MISC 19-000087

OCOTBER 8, 2020

MIDDLESEX, ss.

FOSTER, J.

JUDGMENT

Plaintiff Kenneth B. Krohn, Ph.D. (Krohn) filed his Complaint on February 15, 2019, and the Verified Amended Complaint Pursuant to G.L. ch. 40A, § 17 on March 18, 2019, naming as defendants the Board of Zoning Appeal of the City of Cambridge and its members (the Board), as well as the eight members of the Board, and 12 Arnold Circle, LLC (12 Arnold). On June 5, 2019, Krohn's Motion to File Second Amended Verified Complaint was allowed and the Second Amended Verified Complaint (Complaint) was deemed filed. The Complaint added the City of Cambridge as a defendant (the City of Cambridge and the Board are referred to together as the City) and brought two counts, one under G.L. c. 40A, § 17, and the other under G.L. c. 240, § 14A, both seeking a declaration that the City's Inclusionary Housing Ordinance is invalid. The Answer of The Board of Zoning Appeal of the City of Cambridge was filed on July 1, 2019.

On September 20, 2019, Krohn filed a Motion for Summary Judgment with Respect to his Claim under G.L. c. 240 § 14A, to which the City filed an Opposition and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment on October 22, 2019. A hearing on the cross-motions was held on October 31, 2019, at which consideration of the cross-motions was stayed pending resolution of a settlement agreement in the companion case, Doherty v. Board of Zoning Appeal for the City of Cambridge, Land Court Misc. Case No. 000095 (2019). On February 24, 2020, the City filed Defendants' Supplemental Briefing in Support of Dismissal for Lack of Standing, converting the City's cross-motion for summary judgment to a motion to dismiss (Motion to Dismiss). On March 9, 2020, Krohn filed Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File and Serve Plaintiff's Supplemental Verified Complaint (Motion for Leave), seeking to add 12 Arnold Circle, LLC as a defendant. On August 6, 2020, Krohn filed a Contingent Motion Based upon the "Public Interest Exception" to Mootness (Contingent Motion).

The Motion to Dismiss, Motion for Leave, and Contingent Motion came on to be heard on September 4, 2020. In a Memorandum and Order of even date, the court (Foster, J.) has allowed the Motion to Dismiss, denied the Motion for Leave, and denied the Contingent Motion.

In accordance with the court's Memorandum and Order issued today, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Complaint is DISMISSED with prejudice.