Ilvento v. Frattali

555 A.2d 985, 210 Conn. 432, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 74
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedMarch 21, 1989
Docket13535
StatusPublished
Cited by14 cases

This text of 555 A.2d 985 (Ilvento v. Frattali) 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
Ilvento v. Frattali, 555 A.2d 985, 210 Conn. 432, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 74 (Colo. 1989).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from the action of the planning and zoning commission of the city of Groton approving the application of the named defendant, Eugene Frattali, for a site plan approval and special permit. The trial court dismissed the plaintiffs’ appeal for lack of jurisdiction because of their failure to cite the chairman or clerk of the commission in their appeal. The plaintiffs did, however, cite the commission, and the sheriff did, in fact, leave a “true and attested copy” of the appeal with its chairman, as required by statute, although not specifically directed to do so. General Statutes § 8-28 (a).1 All other necessary parties were properly cited and served.

[434]*434The legislature, when it enacted Public Acts 1988, No. 88-79, in response to our decisions in Simko v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 205 Conn. 413, 533 A.2d 879 (1987), and Simko v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 206 Conn. 374, 538 A.2d 202 (1988), clearly expressed an intention that appeals from the decisions of planning and zoning commissions be heard and decided on their merits and not be invalidated for technical defects in service. Capalbo v. Planning & Zoning Board of Appeals, 208 Conn. 480, 487, 547 A.2d 528 (1988). With that in mind we conclude that the citation and service in this case substantially complied with § 8-28 (a) and were sufficient to ensure that the commission received adequate notice of the plaintiffs’ appeal. See Schwartz v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 208 Conn. 146, 151, 543 A.2d 1339 (1988).

There is error, the judgment is set aside and the case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

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

Related

Fedus v. Planning & Zoning Commission
900 A.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2006)
Lamphere v. Groton Zba, No. 560354 (Aug. 30, 2002)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 11205 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2002)
Polk v. New Milford Zoning Board, Appeals, No. Cv99-00794-74 (Jan. 6, 2000)
2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 248 (Connecticut Superior Court, 2000)
Wood v. Planning Zoning Commission, No. Cv95 146631 (Jan. 10, 1996)
1996 Conn. Super. Ct. 39 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1996)
Peterson v. Hartford Z. B. A., No. Cv93-0530053-S (Aoo) (Feb. 28, 1994)
1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 2095 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1994)
Lomazzo v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals, No. Cv 93-0306397 (Jan. 27, 1994)
1994 Conn. Super. Ct. 806 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1994)
Miller v. Town of Coventry Zoning, No. Cv92 50955s (Nov. 5, 1992)
1992 Conn. Super. Ct. 11128 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1992)
Soucie v. Simsbury Zoning Bd. of Appeals, No. Cv 43 81 16 (Nov. 13, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 9630 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)
Margolin v. Plan. Zon. Comm'n, Hamden, No. Cv90 29 66 17 (Jun. 3, 1991)
1991 Conn. Super. Ct. 5618 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1991)
Mora v. Bridgeport Zoning Appeals, No. Cv89 0263199 S (Jul. 25, 1990)
1990 Conn. Super. Ct. 573 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1990)
Kenney v. Planning & Zoning Board
564 A.2d 637 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1989)
Spicer v. Noank Fire District Zoning Commission
562 A.2d 21 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1989)
Aitken v. Zoning Board of Appeals
557 A.2d 1265 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1989)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
555 A.2d 985, 210 Conn. 432, 1989 Conn. LEXIS 74, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ilvento-v-frattali-conn-1989.