New Hampshire Revised Statutes
N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 677:3 (2026)
Rehearing by Board of Adjustment, Board of Appeals, or Local Legislative Body
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
NH-GCgc.nh.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
677:3 Rehearing by Board of Adjustment, Board of Appeals, or Local Legislative Body. –
I. A motion for rehearing made under RSA 677:2 shall set forth fully every ground upon which it is claimed that the decision or order complained of is unlawful or unreasonable. No appeal from any order or decision of the zoning board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body shall be taken unless the appellant shall have made application for rehearing as provided in RSA 677:2; and, when such application shall have been made, no ground not set forth in the application shall be urged, relied on, or given any consideration by a court unless the court for good cause shown shall allow the appellant to specify additional grounds.
II. Upon the filing of a motion for a rehearing, the board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body shall within 30 days either grant or deny the application, or suspend the order or decision complained of pending further consideration. Any order of suspension may be upon such terms and conditions as the board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body may prescribe. If the motion for rehearing is against a decision of the local legislative body and if the selectmen, as provided in RSA 677:2, shall have called a special town meeting within 25 days from the receipt of an application for a rehearing, the town shall grant or deny the same or suspend the order or decision complained of pending further consideration; and any order of suspension may be upon such terms and conditions as the town may prescribe.
I. A motion for rehearing made under RSA 677:2 shall set forth fully every ground upon which it is claimed that the decision or order complained of is unlawful or unreasonable. No appeal from any order or decision of the zoning board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body shall be taken unless the appellant shall have made application for rehearing as provided in RSA 677:2; and, when such application shall have been made, no ground not set forth in the application shall be urged, relied on, or given any consideration by a court unless the court for good cause shown shall allow the appellant to specify additional grounds.
II. Upon the filing of a motion for a rehearing, the board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body shall within 30 days either grant or deny the application, or suspend the order or decision complained of pending further consideration. Any order of suspension may be upon such terms and conditions as the board of adjustment, a board of appeals, or the local legislative body may prescribe. If the motion for rehearing is against a decision of the local legislative body and if the selectmen, as provided in RSA 677:2, shall have called a special town meeting within 25 days from the receipt of an application for a rehearing, the town shall grant or deny the same or suspend the order or decision complained of pending further consideration; and any order of suspension may be upon such terms and conditions as the town may prescribe.
Source. 1983, 447:1. 1988, 131:5. 1994, 116:2, eff. July 10, 1994.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 42
cases (5 in the last 5 years), 1989–2024 · leading case: Colla v. Town of Hanover, 890 A.2d 916 (N.H. 2006).
Colla v. Town of Hanover, 890 A.2d 916 (N.H. 2006). “The defendant later moved to dismiss the appeal on two grounds: (1) the plaintiffs’ motion for reconsideration to the ZBA failed to comply with RSA 677:3 (1996) because it was “so broad and non-specific that it was impossible for the [ZBA] to understand what its errors may have…”
Cardinal Dev. Corp. v. Town of Winchester Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 958 A.2d 996 (N.H. 2008). “The ZBA highlights Cardinal’s failure to point to any ZBA procedural rule allowing filing by fax. The ZBA further cautions that, if Cardinal is correct that it had until 11:59 p.”
Dziama v. City of Portsmouth, 669 A.2d 217 (N.H. 1995). “The plaintiff did not request a rehearing, but appealed to the superior court pursuant to RSA 677:4 (1986) (amended 1994).”
McDonald v. Town of Effingham Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 872 A.2d 1018 (N.H. 2005). “See RSA 677:3, I (1996). The superior court dismissed the case in reliance upon Dziama v.”
Mountain Valley Mall Assocs. v. Mun. of Conway, 745 A.2d 481 (N.H. 2000). “See RSA 677:3,1 (1996) (no appeal allowed if party fails to file a motion for rehearing).”
New Cingular Wireless PCS, LLC v. Town of Stoddard, 853 F. Supp. 2d 198 (D.N.H. 2012). “N.H.Rev.Stat. Ann. § 677:3, II, does provide that after a motion for rehearing is filed, the local governmental body charged with making zoning decisions “shall within 30 days either grant or deny the application, or suspend the order or decision complained of pending further…”
K & B Rock Crushing, LLC v. Town of Auburn, 904 A.2d 697 (N.H. 2006). “If the legislature *570 wanted to require a motion for rehearing, the petitioners argue, the legislature would have incorporated RSA 677:3 (1996) into RSA 155-E:9, or included similar language in RSA 155-E:9.”
Town of Plaistow Bd. of Selectmen v. Town of Plaistow Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 769 A.2d 397 (N.H. 2001). “On appeal, Taylor asserts that the trial court erred in finding that: (1) the town manager was authorized to request a rehearing on behalf of the board; (2) the request for a rehearing met the requirements of RSA 677:3; and (3) Taylor’s operation of a business on the property…”
Robinson v. Town of Hudson, 821 A.2d 959 (N.H. 2003). “RSA 677:3 (1996) provides, in pertinent part: A motion for rehearing.”
Bartlett v. City of Manchester, 62 A.3d 855 (N.H. 2013). “710, 712 (2008) (construing RSA 677:3); Radziewicz v. Town of Hudson, 159 N.”
Sutton v. Town of Gilford, 992 A.2d 709 (N.H. 2010). “According to the trial court, she had “no persuasive explanation” for failing to do so. Ordinarily, challenges to decisions regarding building permits must first be made to the zoning board of adjustment.”
KSC Realty Trust v. Town of Freedom, 772 A.2d 321 (N.H. 2001). “See RSA 677:3 (1996), :4 (Supp. 2000). Although the superior court affirmed the ZBA, it adopted a different analysis, ruling that the storage of water was a permitted use under the ordinance, but the sale and removal of the water were not permitted accessory uses.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.