Cunningham v. Planning and Zoning Commission of Town of Plainville

Decision Date03 November 2005
CitationCunningham v. Planning and Zoning Commission of Town of Plainville, 888 A.2d 83, 276 Conn. 915 (Conn. 2005)
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesWilliam E. CUNNINGHAM et al. v. PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION OF the TOWN OF PLAINVILLE et al.

The plaintiffs' petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 90 Conn.App. 273, 876 A.2d 1257(2005), is denied.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
4 cases
  • L. D. v. G. T.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • March 1, 2022
    ...its separate parts in order to render a reasonable overall interpretation" (internal quotation marks omitted)), cert. denied, 276 Conn. 915, 888 A.2d 83 (2005) ; by explicitly preserving a party's right to cross-examine witnesses outside of the courtroom, § 46b-15c implies that a party has ......
  • Lepkowski v. Plan. Comm'n
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • April 30, 2024
    ...quotation marks omitted.) Cunningham v. Planning & Zoning Commission, 90 Conn. App. 273, 283, 876 A.2d 1257, cert. denied, 276 Conn. 915, 888 A.2d 83 (2005). [17] "Our Supreme Court has observed that regulations must be interpreted in accordance with the principle that a reasonable and rati......
  • Anketell v. Kulldorff
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • January 16, 2024
    ...plan "[b]ecause the conservation plan was not in evidence before the trial court when it rendered its judgment"), cert. denied, 276 Conn. 915, 888 A.2d 83 (2005); DiBello v. Barnes Page Wire Products, Inc., 67 Conn. App. 361, 374–75, 786 A.2d 1234 (2001) ("[b]ecause the defendant’s claim is......
  • Hayes v. Caspers, Ltd.
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • November 3, 2005