Marchisa v. Catholic Cemeteries Assoc., No. Cv 99 70870 S (Apr. 14, 2000)

Connecticut Superior Court

Marchisa v. Catholic Cemeteries Assoc., No. Cv 99 70870 S (Apr. 14, 2000)

2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 5013

Connecticut Superior Court·Decided April 14, 2000·No. No. CV 99 70870 S·Unpublished

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The Court concludes the plaintiff has standing as that term is defined by case law. It is the plaintiff's daughter that is interred in the cemetery, which was done with the approval of the "Cemetery". She has a specific and personal and legal interest in the subject matter as opposed to a general interest such as would concern members of the community as a whole. She has alleged sufficient facts to establish that her specific personal interest has been specially and CT Page 5014 injuriously affected by the defendant. DiBonaventura v. ZBA,24 Conn. App. 369, 374 (1991). The reasoning of Messina v. LaRosa,337 Mass. 438, 442 (1958), cited by the plaintiff is compelling.

This opinion reflects, of course, only the matter of jurisdiction. The merits of the plaintiff's claim are for the trier of fact to determine.

KLACZAK, JUDGE.

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

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION The Court concludes the plaintiff has standing as that term is defined by case law. It is the plaintiff's daughter that is interred in the cemetery, which was done with the approval of the "Cemetery". She has a specific and personal and legal interest in the subject matter as opposed to a general interest such as would concern members of the community as a whole. She has alleged sufficient facts to establish that her specific personal interest has been specially and CT Page 5014 injuriously affected by the defendant. DiBonaventura v. ZBA,24 Conn. App. 369, 374 (1991). The reasoning of Messina v. LaRosa,337 Mass. 438, 442 (1958), cited by the plaintiff is compelling.

This opinion reflects, of course, only the matter of jurisdiction. The merits of the plaintiff's claim are for the trier of fact to determine.

KLACZAK, JUDGE.

Marchisa v. Catholic Cemeteries Assoc., No. Cv 99 70870 S (Apr. 14, 2000), 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 5013 (Colo. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 5013 (Marchisa v. Catholic Cemeteries Assoc., No. Cv 99 70870 S (Apr. 14, 2000)) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related