State v. Perry

149 Conn. 232, 178 A.2d 279 (1962)

From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

State v. Perry

Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors
149 Conn. 232, 178 A.2d 279 (1962)

  • Written by Tanya Munson, JD

Facts

Mortimer Perry (defendant) was the president of the Pickwick Ice Cream Company (Pickwick). Pickwick manufactured ice cream for over 25 years at its site on Newfield Avenue in Stamford. Before 1951, the site was zoned as an industrial zone. In 1951, the property was rezoned to a commercial residential zone and Pickwick’s industrial use became a nonconforming use. In 1959, Perry brought a large trailer onto the property. The trailer was insulated and equipped with a blower unit and connected by a hose to pipes leading from the manufacturing plant. The trailer was kept at a freezing temperature and used to store materials connected with the production of ice cream. The trailer could be moved by tractor, but it remained on the premises and was constantly connected to the manufacturing plant. In February 1959, the zoning enforcement officer sent Perry a written request to discontinue the use of the trailer. Perry did not discontinue his use of the trailer, and the state of Connecticut (plaintiff) charged Perry with violating Stamford’s zoning regulations. The trial court convicted Perry of violating the regulations, and Perry appealed. Perry argued that the trial court erred in finding him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt based on the evidence.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Shea, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 814,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 814,000 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.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 814,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership