Simpson v. Darien Zba, No. Cv 01 0185848 S (Jan. 15, 2002)

2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 547
CourtConnecticut Superior Court
DecidedJanuary 15, 2002
DocketNo. CV 01 0185848 S
StatusUnpublished

This text of 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 547 (Simpson v. Darien Zba, No. Cv 01 0185848 S (Jan. 15, 2002)) 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
Simpson v. Darien Zba, No. Cv 01 0185848 S (Jan. 15, 2002), 2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 547 (Colo. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

[EDITOR'S NOTE: This case is unpublished as indicated by the issuing court.]

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION ON MOTION TO STRIKE
This is a decision on the defendants' Motion to Strike dated December 21, 2001 #104 argued before the court on January 14, 2002.

The Darien High School Building Committee ("DHSBC") may be the applicant. If it is the applicant, it is an indispensable party to this zoning appeal. Rommell v. Walsh, 127 Conn. 16, 23-24 (1940). A such factual determination should not be made in a decision on a Motion to Strike. P.B. 10-39(b); Liliedahl Bros., Inc. v. Grigsby, 215 Conn. 345,348 (1990).

The failure to cite in and serve a claimed indispensable party does not CT Page 548 deprive the court of jurisdiction and may be cured at a later stage of the proceeding. Fong v. Planning Zoning Board of Appeals, 212 Conn. 628,636-37 (1989); General Statutes §§ 8-8 (g) and (k); Shulman v. ZoningBoard of Appeals, 143 Conn. 182, 183 (1956).

The plaintiffs complaint has alleged the name of the "applicant" and the claimed applicant was served. In deciding a Motion to Strike those pleaded facts must be construed in a manner most favorable to the pleader. Pamela B. v. Ment, 244 Conn. 296, 308 (1998).

The Motion to Strike is denied.

KEVIN TIERNEY, J.

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

Related

Shulman v. Zoning Board of Appeals
120 A.2d 550 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1956)
Rommell v. Walsh
15 A.2d 6 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1940)
Fong v. Planning & Zoning Board of Appeals
563 A.2d 293 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1989)
Liljedahl Bros. v. Grigsby
576 A.2d 149 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1990)
Pamela B. v. Ment
709 A.2d 1089 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2002 Conn. Super. Ct. 547, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/simpson-v-darien-zba-no-cv-01-0185848-s-jan-15-2002-connsuperct-2002.