Opinion
(12558)
The trial court's dismissal of the zoning appeal to it on the ground that the plaintiffs failed to append a prayer for relief to their complaint was erroneous.
Argued April 12, 1985
Decision released June 11, 1985
Appeal from a decision of the defendant board denying the plaintiff's application for a special exception and a certificate of approval of location to allow the continued use of their land for the sale of used cars, brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of New Haven where the court, Higgins, J., sua sponte, dismissed the appeal and the plaintiffs, on the granting of certification, appealed. Error; further proceedings.
William F. Gallagher, with whom, on the brief, was Robert P. Borquez, for the appellants (plaintiffs).
Roger B. Calistro, assistant corporation counsel, with whom, on the brief, were Charles Albom, Abigail Feliciano-Gomez and Gordon Hall, for the appellee (defendant).
The plaintiffs have appealed from a decision of the defendant board of zoning appeals of the city of New Haven that denied their application for a "special exception" and a variance. Noting that "[t]he plaintiffs have failed to seek relief by way of ad damnum or any other claim of relief in their complaint on appeal," the trial court dismissed the action for failure of the plaintiffs "to invoke the jurisdiction of the court . . . ." Our decision in Fisher v. Board of Zoning Appeals, 142 Conn. 275, 113 A.2d 587 (1955), is dispositive and, therefore, we hold that the trial court erred in dismissing this zoning appeal for failing to append to the complaint a prayer for relief.
It was conceded at oral argument before us that the trial court dismissed this matter on its own motion.