Legal Opinion
Tomasso Bros. v. October Twenty-Four, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 18, 1992No. 14249PublishedCited by 43 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtPeters, C. J.
The central issue in this appeal is the propriety of the terms of an injunction issued to protect *195a property owner from a nuisance arising out of the illegal use of neighboring property. The plaintiff, Tomasso Brothers, Inc., brought an action against the defendants, October Twenty-Four, Inc. (October Twenty-Four) and A. Aiudi and Sons (Aiudi),1 alleging that the defendants’ operation of a quarry on land abutting the plaintiff’s property violated applicable zoning regulations and constituted a nuisance rendering the plaintiff’s land unmarketable for its permitted use as a technology park zone…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- Cummings v. TrippSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Reynolds v. VroomSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Jutkowitz v. Department of Health ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- State v. Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-StrattonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Filisko v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- PSE Consulting, Inc. v. MercedeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Tomasso Bros. v. October Twenty-Four, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Housing Authority v. LamotheSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Dornfried v. October Twenty-Four, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- State v. CoccomoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2011
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.