Barnett v. Board of Zoning Appeals

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Barnett v. Board of Zoning Appeals

493 A.2d 228, 196 Conn. 439, 1985 Conn. LEXIS 789

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedJune 11, 1985

Docket12558

StatusPublished

This text of 493 A.2d 228 (Barnett v. Board of Zoning Appeals) 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

Barnett v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 493 A.2d 228, 196 Conn. 439, 1985 Conn. LEXIS 789 (Colo. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs have appealed from a decision of the defendant board of zoning appeals of the city of New Haven that denied their application for a “special exception” and a variance. Noting that “[t]he plaintiffs have failed to seek relief by way of ad damnum or any other claim of relief in their complaint on appeal,” the trial court dismissed the action for failure of the plaintiffs “to invoke the jurisdiction of the court . . . J’¹ Our decision in Fishery. Board of Zon[440]*440ing Appeals, 142 Conn. 275, 113 A.2d 587 (1955), is dis-positive and, therefore, we hold that the trial court erred in dismissing this zoning appeal for failing to append to the complaint a prayer for relief.

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

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

Per Curiam.

The plaintiffs have appealed from a decision of the defendant board of zoning appeals of the city of New Haven that denied their application for a “special exception” and a variance. Noting that “[t]he plaintiffs have failed to seek relief by way of ad damnum or any other claim of relief in their complaint on appeal,” the trial court dismissed the action for failure of the plaintiffs “to invoke the jurisdiction of the court . . . J’¹ Our decision in Fishery. Board of Zon[440]*440ing Appeals, 142 Conn. 275, 113 A.2d 587 (1955), is dis-positive and, therefore, we hold that the trial court erred in dismissing this zoning appeal for failing to append to the complaint a prayer for relief.

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

493 A.2d 228, 196 Conn. 439, 1985 Conn. LEXIS 789, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/barnett-v-board-of-zoning-appeals-conn-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack