Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-9
This is the official text of Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-9, part of Connecticut’s Gen. Stat — part of the compiled statutory law of Connecticut, published by the state as "Gen. Stat." Browse the sections below, each linked to its official government source.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
Sec. 8-9. Appeals from zoning commissions and planning and zoning commissions. Review by Appellate Court.
Official statutory text
Cited. 136 C. 90; 143 C. 280; 145 C. 218, 237, 416, 435; 146 C. 665; 148 C. 33. Standard used by court in reviewing action of zoning commission. 148 C. 172. Cited. 149 C. 681; 151 C. 484; 155 C. 365; 157 C. 522. Determination that keeping of chickens and goats was not an “accessory use” to residential property was within discretion of local zoning board and, where board did not act illegally or in abuse of its discretion, will not be reversed on appeal. 158 C. 509. This section and Sec. 8-8 govern appeals from final zoning authority of municipality. 159 C. 1. Amendment of Sec. 8-8 is operative as to this adopting statute and does not remain unmodified in relation to this statute. 160 C. 239, 249. Cited. 162 C. 74; 165 C. 185; 168 C. 285; 173 C. 408; 174 C. 493; 179 C. 250; 186 C. 106; 211 C. 85; 214 C. 400; 221 C. 374; 225 C. 731; 226 C. 80; Id., 230; 232 C. 122; Id., 419.
Cited. 2 CA 506; Id., 595; 3 CA 172; Id., 576; 4 CA 271; 5 CA 520; 6 CA 317; 43 CA 606.
Cited. 17 CS 116; 19 CS 29. This section and Secs. 8-3 and 8-8 are not so linked that date of publication of notice must be considered as date decision was rendered. 26 CS 88. Plaintiffs' claim that logic dictates that legislature did not intend that there should be an inconsistent procedure relative to appeal from decisions of zoning boards of appeal and zoning boards and that therefore running of appeal period in case of zoning regulation should be contingent on statutory publication is without merit. Id., 90. Equitable relief outside the framework of appeal procedure set up by statute might be granted in the presence of allegations of fraudulent connivance or collusion on the part of local zoning board of appeals; plaintiffs have been granted equitable relief when the zoning authority lacked the jurisdiction to take the action which plaintiff was challenging; equitable relief by way of an injunction will not be granted if the court finds that the legal remedy afforded by statute has not been exhausted. 26 CS 334. Cited. 38 CS 492.
Cited. 2 CA 506; Id., 595; 3 CA 172; Id., 576; 4 CA 271; 5 CA 520; 6 CA 317; 43 CA 606.
Cited. 17 CS 116; 19 CS 29. This section and Secs. 8-3 and 8-8 are not so linked that date of publication of notice must be considered as date decision was rendered. 26 CS 88. Plaintiffs' claim that logic dictates that legislature did not intend that there should be an inconsistent procedure relative to appeal from decisions of zoning boards of appeal and zoning boards and that therefore running of appeal period in case of zoning regulation should be contingent on statutory publication is without merit. Id., 90. Equitable relief outside the framework of appeal procedure set up by statute might be granted in the presence of allegations of fraudulent connivance or collusion on the part of local zoning board of appeals; plaintiffs have been granted equitable relief when the zoning authority lacked the jurisdiction to take the action which plaintiff was challenging; equitable relief by way of an injunction will not be granted if the court finds that the legal remedy afforded by statute has not been exhausted. 26 CS 334. Cited. 38 CS 492.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Need a lawyer in Connecticut?
Find a Connecticut lawyer
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.