Legal Opinion
Gil v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 9, 1991No. 14144PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
The primary issue in this appeal is the standard to be applied in determining whether an inland wetlands agency’s denial of a building permit has effected an unconstitutional taking of an applicant’s property. The plaintiff, Patrick R. Gil, is the owner of residentially zoned property subject to wetlands regulations. After the named defendant, the inland wetlands and watercourses agency of the town of Greenwich (agency),1 denied his fourth application for a building permit because of the perceived adverse impact that the proposed development would have had on the wetlands portion of his…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. MahonSupreme Court of the United States · 1922
- Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1981
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Smith v. Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of GreenwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Bauer v. Waste Management of Connecticut, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- DeBeradinis v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Francini v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.