Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1959

Hadik v. Zoning Board of Appeals

Supreme Court of Connecticut · Decided April 10, 1959

146 Conn. 737; 150 A.2d 606

Cases that cite this one

9 later published cases cite this decision.

Highland Park, Inc. v. Zoning Board of Appeals (Conn. 1967)
Booe v. Zoning Board of Appeals (Conn. 1964)
Corsino v. Grover (Conn. 1961)
Csc Montoya Ltd. v. Branford Planning, No. Cv 00-0443002 (Nov. 29, 2000) (Connecticut Superior Court 2000)
Giglio v. East Haven Zon. Bd. of Appeals, No. Cv96 0392319 (Apr. 15, 1997) (Connecticut Superior Court 1997)
Zarembski v. Easton Zoning Bd., App., No. Cv93 30 53 67 S (Jan. 25, 1994) (Connecticut Superior Court 1994)
Smith v. Bristol Zon. Bd. of Appeals, No. Cv89-0437569 (Jul. 23, 1991) (Connecticut Superior Court 1991)
McGavin v. Zoning Board of Appeals (Connecticut Superior Court 1965)
McGavin v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Town of Westport (Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas 1965)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam.

On the plaintiffs’ own statement of facts, it is clear that any hardship in requiring the plaintiffs to relocate the swimming pool on their property to comply with the regulations affecting the location of structures in residence zones was of the plaintiffs’ own making. Accordingly, the zoning board of appeals quite properly denied the variance sought. Misuk v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 138 Conn. 477, 481, 86 A.2d 180; Wil-Nor Corporation v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 146 Conn. 27, 31, 147 A.2d 197. The judgment dismissing the appeal from the denial of the variance was correct.

There is no error.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.