Legal Opinion
Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency v. Landmark Investment Group, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 14, 1991No. 14177PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
The plaintiff, the inland wetlands and watercourses agency of the city of Middletown, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying its motion to set aside a stipulated judgment entered into between it and the defendant South Farms of Middletown, Inc. (defendant).1 We affirm.
The defendant is the owner of the Talcott Ridge subdivision located in Middletown. In November, 1989, the plaintiff issued a cease and desist order to the defendant for certain alleged violations of the Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act; General Statutes §§ 22a-36 through 22a-45; at the subdivision. Thereafter,…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Lopinto v. HainesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Kenworthy v. KenworthySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- McWilliams v. American Fidelity Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1954
- O'Hara v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Beizer v. GoepfertConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- State v. EllisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Drabik v. Town of East LymeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Crowell v. DanforthSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Dalia v. LawrenceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.