Legal Opinion
Diamond v. Marcinek
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided April 14, 1992No. 9832PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDaly, J.
The defendants appeal from a judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants claim that the trial court improperly (1) found a violation of department of environmental protection (DEP) regulations; Regs., Conn. State Agen*355cies §§ 22a-449 (d)-l (d) (1) and 22a-449 (d)-l (f) (1); because the statute and regulations were not alleged in the complaint, (2) granted rescission of the real estate conveyance, and (3) found that the defendants violated the DEP regulation concerning the reporting and transfer of a facility. Regs., Conn. State Agencies § 22a-449 (d)-l. The…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Kavarco v. T. J. E., Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 1984
- Cahill v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Kavanewsky v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
- Burt's Spirit Shop, Inc. v. RidgwaySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Sciola v. ShernowConnecticut Appellate Court · 1990
3Cited by6 opinions
- Northeast Ct. Economic Alliance, Inc. v. ATC PartnershipSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Diamond v. MarcinekSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Diamond v. MarcinekConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Holly Hill Holdings v. LowmanConnecticut Appellate Court · 1993
- Diamond v. MarcinekSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.