Kielb v. Weinberg Realty Corp.
| Decision Date | 15 November 1960 |
| Citation | 165 A.2d 601,147 Conn. 677 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | Michael KIELB et al. v. WEINBERG REALTY CORPORATION et al. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut |
Sebastian J. Russo, Hartford, for appellants (plaintiffs).
Joseph J. Burns, Asst. Corporation Counsel, Hartford, for the appellees (defendants city of Hartford and others).
David M. Shea, Hartford, with whom, on the brief, was Alfred F. Wechsler, Hartford, for appellee (named defendant).
Before BALDWIN, C. J., and KING, MURPHY, MELLITZ and SHEA, JJ.
The plaintiffs are the owners of residential premises on the south side of Alden Street in Hartford. Their property, hereinafter called the Kielb property, is located in a C-1 residence zone which permits multifamily dwellings, boardinghouses, rooming houses and other buildings of a nonresidential character. Hartford Zoning Ordinance § 42-7 (1947). On the east and west sides of the property there are two driveways, each ten feet wide; they extend from Alden Street southerly into the named defendant's property, which, with these two access driveways, was zoned for business in 1945. Prior to that time, this Weinberg property had been a nonconforming use in a residential zone. There are four large buildings on it, and it covers a rather extensive area. It is landlocked except for three driveways from Alden Street, including the two heretofore mentioned. The third driveway is in a residential zone. The property has been devoted to business and commercial uses for at least fifty years. The block in which the Kielb and Weinberg properties are located lies west of Wethersfield Avenue. Most of the Wethersfield Avenue frontage of the block, including the area adjoining the Weinberg property on the east, is zoned for business. A supermarket and gasoline station are located there. The property on the northwest corner of Alden Street and Wethersfield Avenue is similarly zoned. It is occupied by a large restaurant and night club. The plaintiffs' complaint, dated February 5, 1958, alleged that the change of zone of the Weinberg property was unconstitutional and illegal in that it was the result of unreasonable and arbitrary action by the Hartford zoning authority. The plaintiffs sought to enjoin the named defendant and those in privity with it from using the premises for business purposes, and to enjoin the city of Hartford and its zoning enforcement officer from allowing the property to be used for business. They also sought damages, claiming that the two driveways, by reason of their condition and the use to which they were put, constituted a nuisance. There is no appeal from the portion of the judgment disposing of this feature of the case. We are concerned only with the zoning aspect.
The plaintiffs assign error in the refusal of the trial court to include in its...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
National Broadcasting Co. v. Rose
...facts and if that finding supports its conclusion. Verraster v. Tynan, 152 Conn. 645, 648, 211 A.2d 150; Kielb v. Weinberg Realty Corporation, 147 Conn. 677, 680, 165 A.2d 601. The plaintiff is not entitled to the changes in the finding which it seeks. There is no merit to the claim that ce......
- State v. Schafer
- Secondino v. New Haven Gas Co.
-
Shelton Yacht & Cabana Club, Inc. v. Suto
...v. Salmon, 148 Conn. 631, 632, 173 A.2d 543 and Engelke v. Wheatley, 148 Conn. 398, 411, 171 A.2d 402. Kielb v. Weinberg Realty Corporation, 147 Conn. 677, 680, 165 A.2d 601. It follows that none of the corrections of the finding sought can be The material portions of the finding will now b......