Thoma v. Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Canterbury
632 A.2d 700, 227 Conn. 910, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 348
Opinion
The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 31 Conn. App. 643 (AC 11524), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that: (a) Canterbury Zoning Regulation § 4.12.3 requires, as a condition precedent to subdivision approval, inland wetlands approval; and (b) the zoning regulation conflicts with General Statutes § 8-26?”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Thoma v. Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Canterbury, 632 A.2d 700, 227 Conn. 910, 1993 Conn. LEXIS 348 (Colo. 1993).
632 A.2d 700 (Thoma v. Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of Canterbury) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Thoma v. Planning & Zoning Commission
640 A.2d 1006 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1994)