Legal Opinion

Conetta v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided July 9, 1996No. 14620PublishedCited by 17 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLavery, J.

The defendants1 appeal from the judgment of the trial court sustaining the plaintiffs appeal and reversing the decision of the Stamford zoning board of appeals (board) that the defendant’s plumbing business constituted a lawful nonconforming use. The controlling issue in this appeal is whether the trial court *134impermissibly substituted its factual findings for those of the board.

The facts are as follows. In March, 1993, the plaintiff, a neighbor of the defendant, complained to the Stamford zoning enforcement officer that the defendant was conducting an illegal plumbing business in a…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Huck v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency of GreenwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  2. Jaffe v. State Department of HealthSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
  3. Parsons v. Board of Zoning AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
  4. Stankiewicz v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
  5. Connecticut Sand & Stone Corporation v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by17 opinions

  1. Jaser v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
  2. Wing v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  3. Laurel Beach Ass'n v. Zoning Board of Appeals of MilfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  4. Ammirata v. Zoning Board of AppealsConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  5. Alecta Re Greenwich v. Greenwich Pzb, No. Cv 00 0178095 S (Oct. 18, 2002)Connecticut Superior Court · 2002

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API