Brian Burns v. Town of Madison

Issues on Appeal

The following summaries of the issues on appeal have been prepared by clerk’s office staff for the convenience of the public. The Supreme Court has neither approved nor reviewed any of the summaries. The parties’ filings and the applicable record — not these summaries — define and establish the issues that the Supreme Court will consider in a case. Please note that, in the interest of brevity, some issues in a listed case may have been combined or not summarized. In these summaries, “Rule Type” refers to the particular Supreme Court Rule under which the case has been docketed. “Type” and “Subtype” refer to the case type and case subtype, as determined in accordance with the definitions in the State Court Guide to Statistical Reporting, a publication of the Court Statistics Project (a joint project of the National Center for State Courts and the Conference of State Court Administrators).

Rule Type

Rule 7 Mandatory

Type

Administrative

Subtype

Municipal Board Decision

Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the town's 2022 ordinance, which amended its zoning ordinance to prohibit short-term rentals in single-family residences, does not violate the plaintiff's substantive due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Part I, Article 15 of the New Hampshire Constitution, as well as his fundamental property rights under Part I, Articles 12 and 15 of the New Hampshire Constitution. Whether the supreme court should reconsider its application of rational basis review, as articulated in Boulders at Strafford, LLC v. Town of Strafford, 153 N.H. 633 (2006), and its progeny to zoning ordinances that infringe upon fundamental property rights protected by the New Hampshire Constitution. Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the town's ordinance does not facially violate the equal protection guarantees under Part I, Article 2 of the New Hampshire Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the town's ordinance does not violate the equal protection guarantees under Part I, Article 2 of the New Hampshire Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution as applied to the plaintiff. Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the town's ordinance does not violate the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the United States Constitution. Whether the trial court erred in concluding that the town's ordinance does not violate the Dormant Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution.