Brunswick v. Inland Wetlands Commission

598 A.2d 1100, 220 Conn. 929, 1991 Conn. LEXIS 493
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedNovember 6, 1991
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 598 A.2d 1100 (Brunswick v. Inland Wetlands Commission) 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
Brunswick v. Inland Wetlands Commission, 598 A.2d 1100, 220 Conn. 929, 1991 Conn. LEXIS 493 (Colo. 1991).

Opinion

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 25 Conn. App. 543, is granted, limited to the following issues:

“1 Did the Appellate Court properly hold that the trial court should have dismissed the appeal for want of subject matter jurisdiction because one of the ten plaintiffs was an attorney who also signed the writ?

“2. Was the Appellate Court correct in refusing to find that the withdrawal of the plaintiff-attorney from the appeal cured any defect in the appeal as to the other nine plaintiffs?

“3. Does General Statutes § 8-8 (p) authorize the plaintiffs’ attempt to cure the defect relied upon by the Appellate Court in dismissing the action?”

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

Related

State v. Miller
614 A.2d 1229 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1992)
Brunswick v. Inland Wetlands Commission
610 A.2d 1260 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
598 A.2d 1100, 220 Conn. 929, 1991 Conn. LEXIS 493, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brunswick-v-inland-wetlands-commission-conn-1991.