617 423-0400On February 12, 2026, on behalf of ten Massachusetts residents, our firm obtained an emergency TRO and preliminary injunction in the Middlesex Superior Court against the Town of Concord, its Municipal Light Plant, and MIG Corporation in an environmental enforcement action under G.L. c. 214, § 7A.
The action arises from unpermitted staging, dumping, stockpiling, and related activities at the Town’s property at 1175 Elm Street in Concord. In granting relief, the Court held that the statutory and regulatory framework under the Wetlands Protection Act, G.L. c. 131, § 40, and 310 CMR 10.02(a)–(b), required the Defendants to file a Notice of Intent and obtain an enforceable Order of Conditions, rather than relying solely on a local enforcement order. The Court also rejected Defendants’ reliance on 310 CMR 10.02(d), concluding that the provision applies only to activities occurring outside areas subject to protection and outside the 100‑foot buffer zone. By contrast, the record demonstrated that the challenged activities occurred within protected resource areas and/or the buffer zone.
The Court further found that Plaintiffs established both a likelihood of success on the merits and a likelihood of irreparable harm. The Court explained that, in the § 7A context, Plaintiffs need not show plaintiff‑specific injury, and that the risk of irreparable harm is inherent when the NOI/OOC process is bypassed—as the Town attempted to do here. The balance of harms also favored Plaintiffs, as compliance with the NOI/OOC process imposes no undue burden and promotes orderly and transparent remediation. The Court additionally exercised its discretion to waive the statute’s 21‑day notice requirement.
Under the Order, Defendants are enjoined from conducting any further activity at the Site involving removal, filling, dredging, relocating, grading, excavating, stockpiling, hauling, or otherwise disturbing material in or affecting wetland resource areas and/or the 100‑foot buffer zone, unless and until they file an NOI and receive a valid Order of Conditions. The Court also ordered Defendants to preserve all documentation and communications concerning MIG’s activities at the Site, including remediation efforts.
The decision underscores the central role of the Wetlands Protection Act’s permitting framework and reaffirms that any work affecting protected resource areas or the buffer zone must proceed through the NOI/OOC process with enforceable conditions.
You can review the Court’s Decision and Order: PDF
Case Name: Keith Hannon and others v. MIG Corporation and Town of Concord- No. 2681CV00391
Date of Decision: February 12, 2026
