Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Paradis v. Town of Peru

Supreme Judicial Court of Maine

May 7, 2015

DONALD R. PARADIS
v.
TOWN OF PERU

Argued April 7, 2015.

Judgment of the Superior Court vacated and remanded with instructions to enter an order vacating the decision of the Town of Peru Board of Appeals for lack of jurisdiction.

On the briefs and at oral argument:

Jennifer F. Kreckel, Esq., Kreckel Law, P.A., Rumford, for appellant Donald Paradis.

Theodore Small, Esq., Isaacson & Raymond, P.A., Lewison, for appellee Town of Peru.

Panel: SAUFLEY, C.J., and ALEXANDER, MEAD, GORMAN, JABAR, and HJELM, JJ.

OPINION

Page 611

GORMAN, J.

[¶1] Donald R. Paradis appeals from a judgment of the Superior Court (Oxford County, Clifford, J. ) affirming, pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80B, a decision of the Town of Peru Board of Appeals on Paradis's appeal of a notice of violation issued by the Town's Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) concerning Paradis's construction of a two-car garage. Because the notice of violation was not an appealable decision, we vacate the judgment.

I. BACKGROUND

[¶2] In 2010, Donald Paradis[1] applied for and obtained a building permit to construct a two-car garage on a parcel of property in the Town of Peru.[2] On August 1, 2013, the Town sent Paradis a notice of violation stating that " [a]fter careful consideration amongst the Planning Board, the Board of Selectmen, and the Code Enforcement Officer of Peru," the Town had determined that the garage constructed in 2010 violated multiple Ordinance provisions. The Town " request[ed]" that Paradis take various actions to bring the property into compliance with the Ordinance, including removing certain plumbing fixtures, or else face legal action from the Town. Like the building permit, the notice had three signatories: the chair of the Planning Board, the CEO, and the chair of the Board of Selectmen.

[¶3] Paradis filed an appeal with the Board of Appeals (the Board). After conducting a hearing at which new evidence was taken, by decision dated October 31, 2013, the Board " conclude[d] that the Code Enforcement Officer and the Planning Board properly applied the [Ordinance] provisions" and " voted . . . to deny [the] appeal." The Board declined Paradis's request for reconsideration.

[¶4] On December 11, 2013, Paradis filed a complaint with the Superior Court seeking review of the Board's decision pursuant to M.R. Civ. P. 80B. The Superior Court affirmed the ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.