Laserfiche WebLink
Zoning Bulletin August 25, 2017 I Volume 11 I Issue 16 <br />See also: Caruso v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals of City of Meriden, 320 <br />Conn. 315, 130 A.3d 241 (2016). <br />Case Note: <br />On appeal, the City had also argued that Barton was judicially estopped from <br />bringing an action for inverse condemnation as to 70 South Main. Specifi- <br />cally, the City had argued that Barton. should be estopped from asserting that <br />70 South Main should be valued with the use of 65 South Main as a parking <br />lot since, in his previous eminent domain action, Barton had argued the high- <br />est and best use of 65 South Main as a -mixed use development and not as a <br />parking lot. <br />The court explained, that judicial estoppel applies if: (1) "a party's <br />later position is clearly inconsistent with its earlier position;" (2) "the <br />party's former position has been adopted in some way by the court in <br />the earlier proceeding;" and (3) "the party asserting the two positions <br />would derive an unfair advantage against the party seeking estoppel." <br />The City's argument here rested on the first element of judicial <br />estoppel. The City claimed that Barton's positions with respect to 65 <br />South Main were "clearly inconsistent" in the two eminent domain <br />actions. Barton claimed that the positions were not inconsistent <br />"because a person need not actually use property in accordance with its <br />asserted highest and best use." The Supreme Judicial Court of Con- <br />necticut agreed with Barton. <br />Zoning News from Around the <br />Nation <br />CONNECTICUT <br />Governor Dannel P. Malloy has vetoed House Bill 6880—an afford- <br />able housing relief bill. Reportedly, the bill would have "made it harder <br />for developers to appeal zoning denials by towns of projects." The bill <br />had received 116 votes in the House and 30 votes in the Senate. <br />Source: New Haven Register; www.nhregistercoin <br />NEW YORK <br />Southampton's Town Board has voted to halt future applications for <br />Planned Development Districts. Such districts "grant special zoning <br />regulations —such as creating mixed -use or affordable housing units <br />for a property in a residential zone without changing the zoning for the <br />© 2017 Thomson Reuters 11 <br />