Home/Supreme Court of Connecticut/Arway v. Bloom

Arway v. Bloom

618 A.2d 530, 224 Conn. 924, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 7
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedJanuary 6, 1993
DocketSC 14673
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 618 A.2d 530 (Arway v. Bloom) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Arway v. Bloom, 618 A.2d 530, 224 Conn. 924, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 7 (Colo. 1993).

Opinion

The plaintiffs Christine Arway, Arthur Arway, Dan Smith, Kerin McCormick and Christine McCormick’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 29 Conn. App. 469 (AC 11057), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Whether General Statutes §§ 8-3 (g) and 8-3c (b) require the decision of a zoning commission to be set [925]*925aside when a decision of the wetlands commission affecting the same property is judicially determined to have been illegal?”

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 14673. Jan A. Marcus, in support of the petition. Decided January 6, 1993

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Arway v. Bloom
633 A.2d 281 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
618 A.2d 530, 224 Conn. 924, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 7, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/arway-v-bloom-conn-1993.