Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin September 10, 2016 Volume 10 Issue 17 <br /> E <br /> Governmental Immunity from <br /> Liability—Zoning Commission <br /> Member Engages in Ex Parte <br /> Communications About Application <br /> Applicant sues commission member, but <br /> member claims absolute immunity from suit <br /> Citation: Villages, LLC v. Longhi, 166 Conn. App. 685, 2016 WL <br /> 3523640 (2016) <br /> CONNECTICUT (07/05/16)—This case addressed the issue of <br /> whether a member of a zoning commission is entitled to absolute im- <br /> munity from liability under the common law litigation privilege of <br /> absolute immunity. <br /> The Background/Facts: Villages, LLC ("Villages") owned prop- <br /> erty in the Town of Enfield (the "Town"). In May 2009, Villages ap- <br /> plied to the Town's Planning and Zoning Commission (the "Commis- <br /> sion")for a special use permit and to develop an open space subdivision <br /> for residential housing on the land. After multiple public hearings, the <br /> Commission ultimately voted to deny both applications. <br /> Villages appealed the denials of each application. On appeal, it al- <br /> leged that the Commission"illegally and arbitrarily predetermined the <br /> outcome of each of its applications prior to the public hearing and was <br /> motivated by improper notions of bias and personal animus when it <br /> denied each of the applications." <br /> The trial court sustained Villages' appeals. Among other things, it <br /> found that one of the members of the Commission—Lori Longhi—had <br /> demonstrated bias against Villages and engaged in ex parte com- <br /> munications (i.e., communicating directly with a third patty outside of <br /> hthe public proceedings about information related to Villages' <br /> applications). Finding the Commission's actions were therefore "not <br /> honest, legal, and fair," the court sustained Village's appeals and <br /> remanded the matter back to the Commission for further public <br /> hearings. The Commission appealed but those appeals were denied. <br /> Subsequently, Villages commenced another action (which is the <br /> focus of this summary here)—this time against Lori Longhi("Longhi"), <br /> the commission member who was found to have demonstrated bias <br /> against Villages and to have engaged in ex parte communications re- <br /> lated to Village's applications and yet participated in the public hearing <br /> in which the Commission denied Villages' applications. Villages' al- <br /> ©2016 Thomson Reuters 9 <br />