On July 3, 2025, Middlesex Superior Court issued a summary judgement in favor of The Trustees of Boston College (BC) in its ongoing litigation against the City of Newton, and subsequently the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, related to the Year 2019 City of Newton appropriation of a significant portion of Webster Woods via eminent domain. The judgement invalidated a 1954 deed restriction preventing development on the land. The practical effect of the ruling, if upheld, is likely a sharp increase in the value of the property without that restriction.
A summary judgement is issued when there are no material questions-of-fact between the parties to a dispute, or in this case a component of a dispute, and therefore the court may apply its interpretation of the law to those facts in favor of one party, without a full trial.
Webster Woods is a 22-acre parcel of land abutting the west side of Hammond Pond Parkway north of the Chestnut Hill Mail and south of Beacon Street. A relatively small portion of the property contains a building, parking lot, and access roads, while the majority is undeveloped green space. Last month’s judgement ruled that a 70-year-old deed restriction on the property, limiting its uses to religious or educational purposes, was invalid due to the State constitution’s Anti-Aid Amendment and the Federal Establishment Clause. That restriction placed upon it in 1954 was a condition of the State selling the land to Congregation Mishkan Telifa in that year.
In 2016, BC purchased the land from the Congregation (according to its website the oldest Conservative synagogue in New England), which then moved to Brookline MA. The 2016 purchase price was $20 million and included the continuation of the 1954 deed restriction. In 2019, the City exercised eminent domain to compel the sale of 17.4 acres of the parcel’s undeveloped portion from BC, as described in Mayor Fuller’s e-newsletters on November 12 and December 3 of that year. Preserving green space and contiguity with the larger 88 acre Webster Woods was cited as the City’s primary motivation. (In 2023, the size of the taking was reduced to 14.7 acres because part of the original land was already protected as Massachusetts DCR land.)
The City commissioned an appraisal that valued that portion of the parcel at $15.4 million. The purchase price was intended to be funded with bonded Community Preservation Act funds, which are then repaid over 30 years from future CPA revenues. The CPA is funded via surcharges on real estate transactions.
As anticipated in the Mayor’s announcement of the land acquisition, BC challenged the valuation and initiated a lawsuit in February 2021. The State was added as a defendant in the litigation in 2023 due to BC’s inclusion of the 1954 deed restriction as part of its arguments. This July’s ruling is certainly an interim victory for BC, however several important questions remain unanswered. The final valuation of what the City must pay for the property has not been resolved by the courts. If the value is significantly higher than the 2019 price, can it still be funded with CPA monies? If not, and the purchase price becomes a direct obligation of City taxpayers, can development restrictions still be justified, particularly when housing availability is such a contested political issue? Did the City do thorough diligence in 2016 when it did not make a competing offer to purchase the land from Congregation?
BC’s actions may receive examination as well. Was the price paid to the Congregation in 2016 reasonable, or significantly below what BC knew the property might be worth, assuming its legal advisors had analyzed the 1954 deed restriction at that time? Even if the latter, is that improper, or simply a shrewd economic action? Should BC have any community relations goals today, or solely press for the highest possible appraisal? BC has not yet publicly stated what it believes the land was worth in 2019 at the time of the City’s eminent domain action. The 2023 amended complaint that BC filed, which focused on the legality of the deed restrictions, contains an illuminating history of the actions of the parties, including the City, in 1954 when the State sold the land to the Congregation.
It appears the City intends to contest the current summary judgement. City Solicitor Alissa Giuliani provided this statement to Fig City News:
The City of Newton’s goal is to preserve Webster Woods for public use. The Court’s recent decision to invalidate the deed restriction, which restricted use of the land to religious or educational purposes, raises serious legal questions about whether the Commonwealth’s original transfer of the property to a religious institution in 1954 was ever valid at all. And so, the City has served a motion to request review of the matter by the State’s Appeals Court. We believe it is in the public interest that these serious questions be resolved to avoid an improper windfall to a private party creating an unjust financial burden on the residents of the City of Newton.
— Newton City Solicitor Alissa Giuliani
Ed. Note: We corrected this article to note that the 17.4 acres to be taken by eminent domain were reduced to 14.7 acres, excluding land that was already protected by the Massachusetts Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR).
