Legal Opinion
Stamford Ridgeway Associates v. Board of Representatives
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 3, 1990No. 13805; 13806; 13807; 13808PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtArthur H. Healey, J.
The principal issue that we decide in these appeals is whether § C-552.21 of the Stamford charter permits the board of representatives to vote on separate zone changes contained in one zoning application or whether the board of representatives must act on the entire application. The trial court held that the board was required to act unitarily on the entire application and remanded the case to the board to sustain or overrule the zone changes as a whole. We find error and remand for further proceedings.
On March 11, 1985, the zoning board of the city of Stamford approved a comprehensive…
2Cases cited55 opinions
- Shields v. BarrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Sturman v. SochaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Duguay v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- State v. RodgersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Perez v. Pantasote, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Napoletano v. CIGNA Healthcare of Connecticut, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- LeConche v. ElligersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Department of Public Utility ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Dow & Condon, Inc. v. Brookfield Development Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Hilton v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.