Opinion ID: 1911479
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Exceptions to Rulings of Law

Text: The respondents contend that there exists a right of appeal from the findings of the Selectmen constituting an Adjusting Board and that the petitioner should have proceeded by appeal rather than mandamus. The petitioner in answer asserts that the law provides no method of appeal in this case and that mandamus is the proper procedure. The Town of Orono in the year 1933 enacted a zoning ordinance authorized by provisions of an enabling statute, being R.S. 1930, Ch. 5, Secs. 137-144 inclusive. Sec. 140, as amended by P.L. of 1939, Ch. 127, Sec. 1, provided an appeal from the Municipal Officers or Board of Zoning Adjustment to the Superior Court. The Orono Zoning Ordinance has no provisions regarding appeal from the decisions of the Selectmen constituting an Adjusting Board. Ch. 199, Sec. 6 of the P.L. of 1943, in part, reads as follows: Sec. 6. Relation to other acts. Sections 137 to 144, inclusive, of chapter 5 and sections 31 and 32 of chapter 27 of the revised statutes, as amended, are hereby repealed. In a municipality not having a planning board, ordinances and regulations previously enacted under such sections shall continue in full force and effect and may be amended in accordance with the provisions of such sections until said ordinances and regulations are repealed or superseded by ordinances or regulations under sections 1 to 5, inclusive. The words are clear and unambiguous that Secs. 137 to 144, inclusive, of Ch. 5, as amended, are repealed. This includes obviously Sec. 140 and its amendments, being the appeal section. The provision in Sec. 6: In a municipality not having a planning board, ordinances and regulations previously enacted under such sections shall continue in full force and effect and may be amended in accordance with the provisions of such sections until said ordinances and regulations are repealed or superseded by ordinances or regulations under sections 1 to 5, inclusive. does not affect the repeal of Secs. 137 to 144, inclusive, excepting that it permits a municipality, such as the Town of Orono, to continue with its zoning ordinance which is unaffected by repeal of the mother statute. This is a saving clause and does not disturb the repealing act in so far as the appeal section is concerned. 50 Am.Jur. Statutes, Sec. 527. In view of the fact that there are no appeal provisions in the zoning ordinance and the appeal section of the statute was repealed, there was no provision under which the petitioner could have proceeded by appeal. The finding of the Justice below as to rulings of law was correct and this exception is overruled.