|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Law Libraries' NewsLog > Categories
|
5/20/2009
Burton v. Commissioner of Environmental Protection - SC18173 (Connecticut Environmental Protection Act- § 22a-20; "On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly determined that (1) she lacks standing under § 22a-16, and (2) § 22a-20 does not provide an independent cause of action.") 10/3/2008
Finley v. Inland Wetlands Commission - SC18131 (Inland wetlands and watercourses; approval of permit application by defendant inland wetlands commission for construction of dairy store and restaurant on certain wetlands located on defendant developer's real property; intervention by plaintiffs in administrative proceeding pursuant to provision (§ 22a-19 [a]) of Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, alleging that proposed development of property was reasonably likely to cause pollution to wetlands; appeal by plaintiffs to trial court pursuant to provision (§ 22a-43) of Inland Wetlands and Watercourses Act, claiming that commission's decision was not supported by substantial evidence; motion to dismiss appeal on ground that plaintiffs lacked standing to appeal under §§ 22a-43 and 22a-19 for failure to allege unreasonable impairment of environment; whether trial court's decision denying plaintiffs' appeal and sustaining commission's conditional approval of wetlands permit was appealable final judgment; whether plaintiff environmental intervenors under § 22a-19 were aggrieved by commission's decision granting wetlands permit and had standing to appeal from commission's decision under § 22a-43; whether trial court properly determined that commission's decision granting wetlands permit was supported by substantial evidence in record.)
7/21/2008
Pond View, LLC. v. Planning and Zoning Commission - SC17878
(Zoning; standing; whether court lacks subject matter jurisdiction because the intervenors have raised only procedural issues and therefore do not have standing to bring this appeal as environmental intervenors pursuant to § 22a-19; whether intervenors have standing by virtue of having filed the protest petition in accordance with § 8-3 (b), which, they contend, created a personal and legal interest in, and made them ‘‘indispensable’’ parties to, the present action) 4/28/2008
Bingham v. Dept. of Public Works - SC17817 [Administrative appeal; whether proposed sale of state owned property to municipalities was subject to environmental impact evaluation pursuant to state environmental policy law (§ 22a-1b [c]); aggrievement under Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (§ 4-166 et seq.).] [docket summary] 4/23/2008Commissioner of Environmental Protection v. Mellon - SC17945 - Environment; Attorney's fees; claim that public entity constituted 'person' entitled to recover costs and fees associated with litigation brought pursuant to provision (§ 22a-16) of Connecticut Environmental Protection Act; whether applicable definition of ``person'' was statutory (§ 22a- 2 [c]) definition that included public entities. [docket summary] 3/20/2008
Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. Alves - SC17826
[docket summary: Environment; Whether Plaintiff Established Standing Under General Statutes § 22a-16; Whether Court Ordered Plaintiff to Amend its Complaint so as to Deprive Court of Subject Matter Jurisdiction; Whether Doctrine of the Law of the Case Applied] 3/10/2008
CT Coalition Against Millstone v. CT Siting - SC17987 [docket summary] (Application for permission to build storage facility for spent nuclear fuel; bias; federal preemption; standing; mootness; whether the trial court improperly determined that the council is preempted by the federal Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 42 U.S.C. § 2011 et seq. (Atomic Energy Act), and the relevant regulations of the NRC from considering the radiological risks of the dry storage facility and the related potential impact on the environment; whether the trial court improperly concluded that plaintiff had failed to show the aggrievement necessary to bring his claim of procedural irregularity in terms of the potential bias of council members under the UAPA; whether it was improper for the trial court to refuse to consider plaintiff's claim that there was not substantial evidence before the council on the issue of the public benefit of the proposed spent storage facility)
11/28/2007
ATC Partnership v. Coats North America Consolidated, Inc. - SC17806 ("The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly: (1) concluded that the plaintiff was not entitled to obtain reimbursement from the defendant pursuant to General Statutes § 22a-452 (a) because the plaintiff had not expended any funds for the remediation of the property; (2) concluded that the plaintiff could not prevail on a claim of common-law indemnification; and (3) declined to recognize a cause of action for equitable indemnification. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.") |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|