Legal Opinion

Thurlow v. HULTEN

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided July 5, 2011No. AC 30398PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

PETERS, J.

“[T]he determination of the scope of an easement is a question of fact . . . [and the] decision as to what would constitute a reasonable use of a right-of-way is for the trier of fact whose decision may not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stefanoni v. Duncan, 282 Conn. 686, 699, 923 A.2d 737 (2007). The dispositive issue in this appeal is the relationship between this fact-finding responsibility of the trial court and the procedural requirement of General Statutes § 47-31 (d) that, in an action for adjudication of a claimed…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Lostritto v. Community Action Agency of New Haven, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
  2. Loewenberg v. WallaceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
  3. Peterson v. Town of OxfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  4. Boyles v. PrestonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
  5. Stefanoni v. DuncanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Thurlow v. HULTENSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
  2. Fountain Pointe, LLC v. CalpitanoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
  3. Thurlow v. HultenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
  4. Thurlow v. HultenConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API