Legal Opinion
Silitschanu v. Groesbeck
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 19, 1988No. 13265PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCovello, J.
The first issue in this appeal is whether a septic system constructed on a residential lot to serve a commercial building situated on an adjacent commercial lot constitutes a violation of the Stamford zoning regulations. If so, the further issue remains as to whether the plaintiff neighbors are entitled to injunctive relief restraining the construction of the commercial building.
The plaintiffs have appealed from a decision of the Appellate Court concluding that the Stamford zoning regulations do not apply to septic systems. We granted certification, limited to these issues: (1) whether the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Schwartz v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Lawrence v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Murach v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Karls v. Alexandra Realty Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
- Scoville v. RonalterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Spero v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Zarembski v. WarrenConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- International Ass'n of Firefighters, Local 786 v. SerraniConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Steroco, Inc. v. SzymanskiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016
- Lawrence v. Dept. of Energy & Environmental ProtectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2017
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.