Legal Opinion · Dissent

Loring v. Planning & Zoning Commission

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided July 15, 2008No. 17886, 17887Published

1Dissent

NORCOTT, J.,

with whom ZARELLA, J., joins, dissenting. I disagree with part I of the majority opinion, which concludes that the decision of the defendant, the *773planning and zoning commission (commission) of the town of North Haven (town), which determined that fifteen video preview booths are not an accessory use for an adult oriented book and video store located in town, was not supported by substantial evidence. In my view, the commission reasonably could have determined that the booths did not constitute an accessory use, as defined in § 6.1.71 of the North Haven zoning regulations,1 to the…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. Feinson v. Conservation CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  2. Spero v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
  3. Lawrence v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
  4. Parsons v. Board of Zoning AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
  5. Builders Service Corp. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988

23 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