Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ******************************************************

RHONDA M. MARCHESI v. BOARD OF SELECTMEN OF THE TOWN OF LYME ET AL. (AC 29999)
Harper, Lavine and Mihalakos, Js. Argued November 17, 2010--officially released August 30, 2011

(Appeal from Superior Court, judicial district of New London, Abrams, J.) Kenneth M. McKeever, town attorney, for the appellants (named defendant et al.). Harry B. Heller, for the appellee (plaintiff).

Opinion

HARPER, J. The defendants in this administrative appeal, the board of selectmen of the town of Lyme (board) and the town of Lyme (town),1 appeal from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the plaintiff, Rhonda M. Marchesi. The defendants claim that the court improperly (1) concluded that the parties were entitled to a trial de novo, (2) concluded that the board had exceeded its authority by determining that a highway existed on the plaintiff's property, (3) determined that there were no issues of material fact to preclude the granting of summary judgment and (4) made a finding of fact unsupported by the evidence.2 We affirm the judgment of the trial court. The record reveals the following undisputed facts and procedural history. Brockway Ferry Road3 is a highway located near the shore of the Connecticut River in Lyme. The plaintiff owns real property, improved with a single family residence, on Brockway Ferry Road. In 2006, several other proprietors of real property abutting Brockway Ferry Road filed a petition, pursuant to General Statutes

Download Marchesi v. Board of Selectmen.pdf

Connecticut Law