Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership

Connecticut Appellate Court

Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership

924 A.2d 141, 101 Conn. App. 401, 2007 Conn. App. LEXIS 216

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedMay 29, 2007

DocketAC 27218

StatusPublished

This text of 924 A.2d 141 (Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership, 924 A.2d 141, 101 Conn. App. 401, 2007 Conn. App. LEXIS 216 (Colo. Ct. App. 2007).

Pincite

Opinion

*402 Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This condemnation action returns to us following a remand to the trial court. See Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partner ship, 83 Conn. App. 343, 849 A.2d 896 (2004). In this appeal, the defendant Bakery Place Limited Partnership 1 challenges the court’s award of $1 in damages as just compensation for the taking of certain real property in New Britain. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Our examination of the record and briefs and our consideration of the arguments of the parties persuade us that the judgment should be affirmed. On the facts of this case, the issues properly were resolved in the court’s complete and well reasoned memorandum of decision. See Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership, 50 Conn. Sup. 299, 925 A.2d 468 (2005). We therefore adopt it as the proper statement of the relevant facts, issues and applicable law, as it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion contained therein. See State v. Pepper, 272 Conn. 10, 14, 860 A.2d 1221 (2004); Santiago v. State, 64 Conn. App. 67, 68-69, 779 A.2d 775, cert. denied, 258 Conn. 913, 782 A.2d 1246 (2001).

The judgment is affirmed.

1

Although named as a defendant in this action, the city of New Britain is not a party to this appeal.

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

*402 Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This condemnation action returns to us following a remand to the trial court. See Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partner ship, 83 Conn. App. 343, 849 A.2d 896 (2004). In this appeal, the defendant Bakery Place Limited Partnership 1 challenges the court’s award of $1 in damages as just compensation for the taking of certain real property in New Britain. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Our examination of the record and briefs and our consideration of the arguments of the parties persuade us that the judgment should be affirmed. On the facts of this case, the issues properly were resolved in the court’s complete and well reasoned memorandum of decision. See Commissioner of Transportation v. Bakery Place Ltd. Partnership, 50 Conn. Sup. 299, 925 A.2d 468 (2005). We therefore adopt it as the proper statement of the relevant facts, issues and applicable law, as it would serve no useful purpose for us to repeat the discussion contained therein. See State v. Pepper, 272 Conn. 10, 14, 860 A.2d 1221 (2004); Santiago v. State, 64 Conn. App. 67, 68-69, 779 A.2d 775, cert. denied, 258 Conn. 913, 782 A.2d 1246 (2001).

The judgment is affirmed.

1

Although named as a defendant in this action, the city of New Britain is not a party to this appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

924 A.2d 141, 101 Conn. App. 401, 2007 Conn. App. LEXIS 216, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/commissioner-of-transportation-v-bakery-place-ltd-partnership-connappct-2007.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack