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

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedApril 14, 2000

DocketNo. CV 99 70870 S

StatusUnpublished

This text of 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 5013 (Marchisa v. Catholic Cemeteries Assoc., No. Cv 99 70870 S (Apr. 14, 2000)) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 5013, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marchisa-v-catholic-cemeteries-assoc-no-cv-99-70870-s-apr-14-2000-connsuperct-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack