Legal Opinion
Sobol v. Planning & Zoning Commission
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 13, 1969PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Per curiam
The trial court substituted its judgment for that of the defendant commission. It had no authority to do so. Belknap v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 155 Conn. 380, 384, 232 A.2d 922, and cases cited; see Hawkes v. Town Plan & Zoning Commission, 156 Conn. 207, 240 A.2d 914.
There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded with direction to dismiss the appeal.
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Belknap v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1967
- Hawkes v. Town Plan & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
3Cited by4 opinions
- Housatonic Terminal Corp. v. Planning & Zoning BoardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Horvath v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Kish v. Planning & Zoning BoardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
- Clapp v. South Windsor Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971