Graff v. Zoning Board of Appeals
Supreme Court of Connecticut
894 A.2d 285 (2006)
- Written by Anjali Bhat, JD
Facts
Nicole Graff (plaintiff) owned nine acres of land within the rural Town of Killingworth. Graff kept 14 dogs on the land. Graff tried to address neighbors’ complaints about the dogs, including by surgically de-barking several of her dogs. The planning-and-zoning commission passed a resolution that the keeping of four or fewer dogs in a household was a permissible accessory use of residential property, while the keeping of more than four dogs was not. Graff unsuccessfully appealed to the zoning board of appeals (the Board) (defendant). Graff then sued, and the trial court found in Graff’s favor. The Board appealed, arguing that household pets were accessory land uses subject to limitation under town regulations. Graff argued that the number of household pets was unaddressed by and therefore exempt from regulation. Graff further argued that the keeping of household pets was not a use of land, but rather a use of a house.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Borden, J.)
Concurrence (Katz, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 803,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
