Legal Opinion
Town of Canterbury v. Deojay
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 2, 2009No. AC 29602PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ROBINSON, J.
The aesthetic pleasure that results from the transformation of a neglected piece of property into a blueberry farm cannot override the requirements of the state and local zoning regulations. The defendants, Christopher Deojay and Tina Deojay, appeal from the judgment of the trial court enjoining them from performing any further work on their property and imposing a fine, costs and fees. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts and procedural history are necessary for our resolution of the defendants’ appeal. The defendants purchased property located at…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Cioffoletti v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Akin v. City of NorwalkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Cannata v. Department of Environmental ProtectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Gelinas v. Town of West HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Jarvis Acres, Inc. v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Willamette Management Associates, Inc. v. PalczynskiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Red 11, LLC v. Conservation CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- SUMMITWOOD DEVELOPMENT, LLC v. RobertsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Booker v. JarjuraConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
- Metropolitan District v. Commission on Human Rights & OpportunitiesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.