Old Rock Road Corp. v. Commission On Special Revenue

• Decision Date: 09 August 1977
• Citation: 377 A.2d 1119,173 Conn. 384
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: OLD ROCK ROAD CORPORATION v. COMMISSION ON SPECIAL REVENUE et al.

Page 1119

377 A.2d 1119

173 Conn. 384

OLD ROCK ROAD CORPORATION v. COMMISSION ON SPECIAL REVENUE et al.

Supreme Court of Connecticut.

Argued June 14, 1977.

Decided Aug. 9, 1977.

James J. A. Daly, Bridgeport, with whom were Timothy F. Monahan, Milford, and, on the brief, Daniel E. Brennan, Robert J. Brennan, Jr., and John P. Bashar, Bridgeport, for the appellant (plaintiff).

Richard M. Sheridan, Asst. Atty. Gen., with whom, on the brief, was Carl R. Ajello, Atty. Gen., for the appellee (named defendant).

Mark A. Asmar, Hartford, with whom, on the brief, was Preston F. Harding, Hartford, for the appellee (defendant Sawmill Brook Racing Association, Inc.).

Before HOUSE, C. J., and LOISELLE, BOGDANSKI, LONGO and SPONZO, JJ.

BOGDANSKI, Associate Justice.

On June 9, 1976, the commission on special revenue denied the plaintiff's motion to intervene in the commission's proceedings of that day which involved, among other matters, an application by the defendant Sawmill Brook Racing Association, Inc., hereinafter the association, for a license to conduct horse races in the town of Middletown. From the denial of that motion, the plaintiff appealed to the Court of Common Pleas. The commission and the defendant association filed pleas in abatement, alleging that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the appeal, which were sustained by the court. From the judgment rendered dismissing the appeal, the plaintiff appealed to this court and briefed the following issues: (1) a claim of error in the court's finding, and (2) a claim of error in the court's conclusion as to lack of jurisdiction.

The court found the following facts: On May 7, 1974, the commission issued a provisional license to the plaintiff to conduct horse races in the town of Wolcott conditioned on the receipt by the plaintiff of certain permits from other state agencies. At that time, the commission adopted a one-racetrack policy. On April 2, 1976, the department of environmental protection denied the plaintiff's application for two of the required permits for the development of the Wolcott racetrack.

At a meeting held on June 9, 1976, the commission denied the plaintiff's motion to intervene, voted to rescind the one-racetrack policy, and granted a provisional license to the defendant association to conduct horse races in the town of Middletown, subject to the association's receipt of various permits from other state agencies. The commission voted also to grant the plaintiff a hearing in the future to show cause why its license should not be revoked for failure to obtain the necessary permits from the department of environmental protection.

On this appeal, the plaintiff seeks to correct the finding made by the court. Even if all the corrections sought were granted, the conclusion of the court as to a lack of jurisdiction could nevertheless stand, as it would still be supported by the finding. Sullivan v. Bonafonte, 172 Conn. 612, 376 A.2d 69.

Appeals to the courts from the decisions of administrative agencies exist only under statutory authority. Nader v Altermatt,166 Conn. 43, 53, 347 A.2d 89. Since the plaintiff does not claim that it was denied a license by the commission, the plaintiff lacks standing to appeal pursuant to the provisions of § 12-574(b). ¹ To establish a right to appeal under the provisions of § 4-183, the plaintiff must show that it is "aggrieved by a final decision."

In this jurisdiction the test for determining "aggrievement" to qualify for an appeal from a decision of an administrative agency is well settled. First, one must demonstrate a specific, personal and legal interest in the subject matter of the decision. Second, the party claiming aggrievement must establish that the personal and legal interest has been specially and adversely affected by the decision. New Haven v. Public Utilities Commission,165 Conn. 687, 700, 345 A.2d 563; Sheridan v. Planning Board, 159 Conn. 1, 13, 266 A.2d 396. Similarly, under federal standards, to obtain judicial review of a decision of a federal agency a plaintiff must demonstrate an "injury in fact."...