Home/Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court/Gould v. Greylock Reservation Commission

Gould v. Greylock Reservation Commission

215 N.E.2d 114, 350 Mass. 410, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 751
CourtMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
DecidedMarch 10, 1966
StatusPublished
Cited by26 cases

This text of 215 N.E.2d 114 (Gould v. Greylock Reservation Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Gould v. Greylock Reservation Commission, 215 N.E.2d 114, 350 Mass. 410, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 751 (Mass. 1966).

Opinion

Cutter, J.

Five citizens 1 of Berkshire County seek a writ of mandamus and declaratory relief against the Greylock Reservation Commission (the Commission) and the Mount Greylock Tramway Authority (the Authority). They ask for a declaration that two instruments are invalid, viz. a 1960 lease to the Authority of 4,000 acres in the Greylock State Reservation and a 1964 agreement between the Authority and a management corporation. They also seek to prohibit the Commission and the Authority from proceeding with a scheme for the leased area for an aerial tramway, ski lifts, and a ski resort. A judge of the Superior Court adopted a thorough auditor’s report as his findings of material facts 2 and made rulings. He ordered that the petition be dismissed. The petitioners appealed.

Mount Greylock (3,491 feet) is the highest summit of an isolated range surrounded by “lands of considerably lower elevation.” Prior to 1888, this range was subject to commercial lumbering operations. About 1888, a group of citizens “became associated . . . for the purpose of preserving Mount Greylock as an unspoiled natural forest.” By St. 1885, c. 166, a corporation (Greylock Park Association) was formed “for the purpose of laying out a public park upon Greylock Mountain.” It did acquire about 400 acres including the mountain summit. .

“Through the efforts of persons interested in preserving Mount Greylock in its natural state for the . . . [public] *412 benefit,” the Greylock State Reservation was established by St. 1898, c. 543. Section 1 provided for an unpaid commission appointed by the Governor. The Commission (§2) was authorized to acquire 10,000 acres to be known as the Greylock State Reservation, and was given (§4) certain powers of the Metropolitan Park Commission (St. 1893, c. 407). A grant of $25,000 from the Commonwealth’s treasury (§ 3) was not to be available (§ 7) until the property held by Greylock Park Association £ 1 shall have been transferred to the Commonwealth.” This was done in 1899. The Commonwealth has since acquired about 8,400 additional acres. The auditor found that there was “no evidence of . . . any restrictions or conditions in any of the deeds” to the Commonwealth of land in the reservation.

Access to the summit is now provided by two roads, the Rockwell Road from New Ashford and the Notch Road from North Adams. West of the summit these two roads join a short road to the summit itself. A simplified outline map (based on exhibits) is annexed 3 upon which these roads are shown 4 together with certain principal features of the proposed tramway and ski area.

*413

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Kalorama Citizens Ass'n v. SunTrust Bank, Co.
District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2022
Black v. Cutko
Maine Superior, 2021
Smith v. City of Westfield
Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 2017
Pratt v. City of Boston
483 N.E.2d 812 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1985)
District of Columbia, a Municipal Corporation v. Air Florida, Inc.
750 F.2d 1077 (D.C. Circuit, 1984)
Kootenai Environmental Alliance, Inc. v. Panhandle Yacht Club, Inc.
671 P.2d 1085 (Idaho Supreme Court, 1983)
Opinions of the Justices to the Senate
424 N.E.2d 1092 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1981)
Toro v. Mayor of Revere
401 N.E.2d 853 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1980)
Boston Waterfront Development Corp. v. Commonwealth
393 N.E.2d 356 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1979)
San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc. v. Compadres
81 Cal. App. 3d 923 (California Court of Appeal, 1978)
Boston Waterfront Development Corp. v. Commonwealth
374 N.E.2d 598 (Massachusetts Appeals Court, 1978)
Dunphy v. Commonwealth
331 N.E.2d 883 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1975)
Douglas v. Woods Hole, Martha's Vineyard & Nantucket Steamship Authority
319 N.E.2d 892 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1974)
State ex rel. West Virginia Housing Development Fund v. Waterhouse
212 S.E.2d 724 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1974)
STATE EX REL. W. VA., ETC. v. Waterhouse
212 S.E.2d 724 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1974)
State Ex Rel. Hall v. Taylor
178 S.E.2d 48 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1970)
Paepcke v. Public Building Commission
263 N.E.2d 11 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1970)
Abbot v. Commissioners
260 N.E.2d 142 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Town of Brookline v. Metropolitan District Commission
258 N.E.2d 284 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1970)
Opinions of the Justices to the House of Representatives
250 N.E.2d 547 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
215 N.E.2d 114, 350 Mass. 410, 1966 Mass. LEXIS 751, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gould-v-greylock-reservation-commission-mass-1966.