Cohen v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Plymouth

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that conclusory assertions of increased traffic, without evidence of specific injury to abutter's property, was insufficient to confer standing on abutter
• concluding that the affidavit of a professional traffic engineer, which contained only general conclusory statements purporting to address the plaintiffs claims of adverse effect of the construction of a shopping center, was insufficient to allow standing
• “in a multiple party appeal it is only necessary to determine whether any one plaintiff is aggrieved in order to determine the standing issue”
• deponents’ inability to “articulate whether or how the plaintiffs would be injured” were not conclusive but caused presumption of standing “to recede”
• \general and conclusory allegations of the affidavit cannot be 6 transformed by inference into genuine triable issues\
• “[T]he general and conclusory allegations of the affidavit cannot be transformed by inference into genuine triable issues”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).