Laserfiche WebLink
of the Mass. Practice Series. <br /> Furthermore, I cite, Cullen v. Planning Board of Hadley, 355 N.E. <br /> 2d 490, 4 Mass. App. 842 (1976) , wherein a "developer hand <br /> delivered an application for approval of the plan to the Hadley <br /> town clerk, for which a receipt was deliverd." It was contended <br /> that the subdivision application was not properly submitted in <br /> either of the ways provided in G.L. C. 41 Sec. 81 0, as it was <br /> not delivered at a meeting of the planning board or sent by <br /> registered mail to the planning board, care of the town clerk, <br /> but instead hand delivered to the town clerk. <br /> The court went on to hold "no useful purpose would be served by <br /> interpreting G.L. C. 41 Sec. 81 0, so narrowly as to preclude <br /> hand delivery of applications to the town clerk's office. Nor, <br /> we suggest, would it make sense to question notice and delivery <br /> where the town clerk received notice and the Planning Board " <br /> actually received the plans. I enclose copy of the Cullen <br /> decision for your convenience, as it is brief. <br /> We further -submit, a fortiori, that mailing to the planning board <br /> by certified mail, with a stamped receipt to show the date of <br /> mailing (said date being the date of submission of the plan as <br /> provided by Sec. 810, last sentence) serves the statutory -- - - <br /> provisions better than delivering it to the town clerk, as in the <br /> Cullen case, especially where the town of Mashpee has a full time <br /> planning office or officer to receive such mail. It is obvious <br /> that the statute contemplated the fact that many towns did not <br /> have a planning office or staff at the time of enactment of the <br /> second paragraph by Chapter 804 of the Acts of 1963 and inserted <br /> the provision regarding care of the town clerk. <br /> � i <br /> I request that you review this issue and would like to discuss it <br /> with your, if there are any further questions. It seems clear <br /> that a court would uphold our position and I seek to aleviate the <br /> cost of the town of court proceedings, let alone my clients. `! <br /> The matter was postponed until June 15th, 1988 . I would <br /> appreciate an early response so I may determine future action. <br /> Very truly yours, <br /> Donald H. Angus <br /> DHA/lr <br /> cc; Leslie Ann Morse, Esq. <br /> Mashpee Planning Board <br /> Charles Rowley <br /> 2 <br />