Liolis v. Franklin Zoning Board of Adjustment
This text of 395 A.2d 1255 (Liolis v. Franklin Zoning Board of Adjustment) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Hampshire primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Memorandum Opinion
Plaintiff, a licensed hairdresser, seeks to open a hairdressing or beauty shop in her Franklin home. The home is in an 0-1 zone, which under the Franklin zoning ordinance permits “accessory uses” that are “incidental and subordinate to the principal use.” The board of adjustment found that the hairdressing occupation was a home occupation but not an accessory use, and denied the plaintiff a use permit. [929]*929On agreed facts, the Master (Robert A. Carignan, Esq.) denied the plaintiff relief. Her exception was reserved by Mullavey, J. We reverse.
Section 608 of the ordinance defines “home occupations” as activities “such as” art studios, dressmaking or teaching, and, if these occupations comply with certain other conditions of the section, requires that these home occupations be permitted as accessory uses. Both parties agree that the plaintiff’s use will comply with the conditions of section 608; the use therefore must be permitted as an accessory use. The master’s ruling denying the plaintiff relief is clearly incorrect.
Exceptions sustained.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
395 A.2d 1255, 118 N.H. 928, 1978 N.H. LEXIS 327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/liolis-v-franklin-zoning-board-of-adjustment-nh-1978.