Grimes v. Conservation Commission’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Huck v. Inland Wetlands & Watercourses Agency of Greenwich · Samperi v. Inland Wetlands Agency · State v. Glover · Connecticut Fund for the Environment, Inc. v. City of Stamford · May v. Penn TV & Furniture Co., Inc.
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Hoffman does not require, as the plaintiff claims, the commission to consider adjoining land; rather, it merely permits the commission to consider adjoining land when such land is relevant. . . . If, as in Hoffman, the commission is considering a proposal, the development of which will have a significant impact on the wetlands and watercourses, then consideration of adjoining land would be relevant in preserving and protecting the wetlands and watercourses and in determining whether a feasible and prudent alternative exists. Adjoining land becomes irrelevant, however, when the proposed development does not have a significant impact on the wetlands and watercourses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Pursuant to General Statutes § 22a-41 (b)(1), the commissioner must find that `a feasible and prudent' alternative to the applicant's development plan does not exist before issuing a permit. In making this finding, the commissioner `shall take into consideration all relevant facts and circumstances including but not limited to' the six statutory factors 3 in determining whether a feasible and prudent alternative exists. . . .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.