Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Citation
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Parent Document
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut (state)
- Effective Date
- 2002-12-17
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7911954/blitz-v-subklew/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (20)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
- Blitz v. Subklew, 74 Conn. App. 183 (2002)
Full Text
615 charsThe board members expressed a desire to visit the property a second time with the intention of inspecting the property for the appropriateness of authorizing such a use. Presumably, following the next site inspection, the board would then be able to render a decision on the application for automobile sales at the next meeting. The defendant then stated to the board that another thirty day delay to give the board an opportunity to view the property would mean that he would be unable to go through with the project because of time limits on the financial funding that he had procured to finance his new business.