Opinion · Connecticut Appellate Court Opinions
MUNROE v. ZONING BOARD, 258 Conn. 903 (2001)
LOREN YOUNG MUNROE v. ZONING Bd. OF APPEALS OF THETOWN OF BRANFORD, 782 A.2d 137 (Conn. 2001)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Connecticut Appellate Court Opinions
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut
- Date
- 2001-09-13
- Topic
- general
MUNROE v. ZONING BOARD, 258 Conn. 903 (2001) 782 A.2d 137 LOREN YOUNG MUNROE ET AL. v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THETOWN OF BRANFORD ET AL.Supreme Court of Connecticut The plaintiffs' petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 63 Conn. App. 748 (AC 19672), is granted, limited to the following issues: "1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the thirty day period for appeal to a zoning board of appeals under General Statutes § 8-7 was from the date of the zoning officer's action and not from the date of notice of that action?
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed MUNROE v. ZONING BOARD, 258 Conn. 903 (2001). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
"1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the thirty day period for appeal to a zoning board of appeals under General Statutes §8-7was from the date of the zoning officer's action and not from the date of notice of that action?
"2. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, the zoning board of appeals lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs' appeal from the issuance of the building permit?"Page 904
VERTEFEUILLE and ZARELLA, Js., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.
The Supreme Court docket number is S.C. 16576.William F. Gallagher, in support of the petition.