Legal Opinion
Thoma v. Planning & Zoning Commission
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 26, 1994No. 14830PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Per curiam
The dispositive issue in this land use appeal is whether a town regulation can lawfully limit the discretion that General Statutes § 8-261 confers on a town planning and zoning commission. The defendants Theodore G. Dean and Beverly H. Dean (defendants) sought approval for a proposed subdivision in the town of Canterbury. The named defendant, the planning and zoning commission of the town of Canterbury (commission), granted their application despite its having been disapproved by the town inland wetlands commission. The plaintiffs, Barbara Thoma and Theodore W. Dean, appealed to the trial…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Stankiewicz v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Whisper Wind Development Corp. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Arway v. BloomConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Arway v. BloomSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Board of Education v. State Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- River Bend Associates, Inc. v. Planning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Andrews v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Belcher v. Stafford Pzc, No. Cv 9558178s (Jun. 3, 1997)Connecticut Superior Court · 1997
- Boris v. Garbo Lobster Company, Inc., No. 548853 (Dec. 3, 1999)Connecticut Superior Court · 1999
- Edelson v. Planning Commission, No. Cv 93-0455273s (Sep. 16, 1994)Connecticut Superior Court · 1994
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.