Legal Opinion
Conservation Commission of Fairfield v. Red 11, LLC
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided May 29, 2012No. AC 32720PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
LAYINE, J.
The principal issue in this appeal is whether the intervening plaintiff, Wilmington Trust Company (Wilmington), properly was awarded attorney’s fees under General Statutes § 22a-44 (b) of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act (wetlands act), which provides in relevant part that reasonable attorney’s fees may be awarded to the “person which brought such action. . . .” The defendant, Red 11, LLC, doing business as Twin Oak Farms, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding Wilmington attorney’s fees. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court (1)…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Red Hill Coalition, Inc. v. Conservation CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Horton v. MeskillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- State v. FERNANDO A.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Smith v. SnyderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Windels v. Environmental Protection CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Francini v. RiggioneConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
- Cohen v. Dept. of Energy & Environmental ProtectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2022
- East Windsor v. East Windsor Housing, Ltd.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2014
- Trade Links, LLC v. BI-QEM SA de CVDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2023