Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of Groton
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FOTI, J.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing the plaintiffs inverse condemnation action on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear it. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly determined that (1) a landowner must always submit more than one application for a variance to a zoning board of appeals *515for the denial of the variance to be considered a “final action” under the taking clauses of the United States and Connecticut constitutions, (2) a landowner must appeal the denial of a variance to the Superior…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Maryland Casualty Co. v. Pacific Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- United Public Workers of America v. MitchellSupreme Court of the United States · 1947
- Webb's Fabulous Pharmacies, Inc. v. BeckwithSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Milford Power Co v. Alstom Power, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Esposito v. SpecyalskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
- Bonge v. County of MadisonNebraska Supreme Court · 1998
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.