Opinion
By statute ( 51-197f, as amended by Public Acts, Spec. Sess., June, 1983, No. 83-29, 7), "[u]pon final determination of any appeal by the appellate court, there shall be no right to further review except . . . the supreme court shall have the power to certify cases for its review upon petition by an aggrieved party. . . ." The plaintiff, whose petition for certification to the Appellate Court from the Superior Court's judgment dismissing her zoning appeal was denied, petitioned this court for certification. Because, by statute ( 8-28, as amended by Public Acts, Spec. Sess., June, 1983, No. 83-29, 59), the plaintiff could appeal to the Appellate Court only on its granting of certification, that court's denial of her petition was not a "final determination of [an] appeal by the appellate court" within the meaning of 51-197f. Accordingly, this court, not having jurisdiction to consider the plaintiff's petition, dismissed it sua sponte.
Decision released August 21, 1984
Appeal by the plaintiff from the defendant planning and zoning commission's approval of a subdivision application filed by the defendants Francis Gomez et al., brought to the Superior Court in the judicial district of Litchfield and tried to the court, Pickett, J.; judgment dismissing the appeal from which the plaintiff petitioned the Appellate Court for certification. On that court's denial of the petition, the plaintiff petitioned this court for certification. Petition dismissed sua sponte.
J. Keith Nolan, for the petitioner (plaintiff).
William O. Riiska, for the respondents (defendants Francis Gomez et al.).
The plaintiff appealed to the Superior Court from a decision of the Salisbury planning and zoning commission. Her appeal was dismissed. She then petitioned the Appellate Court for certification for review. The Appellate Court denied her petition, and she now petitions this court for certification, alleging that she is aggrieved by the decision of the Superior Court and by the decision of the Appellate Court denying her petition.
Appeals from zoning commissions and planning commissions may be taken to the Superior Court, and, upon certification only, to the Appellate Court. See, e.g., General Statutes 8-28, as amended by Public Acts, Spec. Sess., June, 1983, No. 83-29, 59. The Supreme Court's authority to grant petitions for certification from the Appellate Court is found in General Statutes 51-197f, as amended by Public Acts, Spec. Sess., June, 1983, No. 83-29, 7. That statute provides, in pertinent part, that "[u]pon final determination of any appeal by the appellate court, there shall be no right to further review except . . . [t]he supreme court shall have the power to certify cases for its review upon petition by an aggrieved party . . . "(Emphasis added.) See also Practice Book 3135. The issue before us here is whether 51-197f permits us to consider a petition for certification following the denial of certification by the Appellate Court in a zoning or planning matter.
"[Practice Book] Sec. 3135. RIGHT OF APPEAL "Appeals may be taken to the supreme court in causes determined in the appellate court where the supreme court, upon petition of an aggrieved party or request of the appellate panel which heard the case, certifies the case for review."
Because, under 8-28, as amended, the plaintiff could not appeal to the Appellate Court in the absence of that Court's certification; see also Practice Book 2000, 3154 (matter deemed "pending on appeal" and entered upon the docket after granting of certification); we hold that the decision of the Appellate Court denying the plaintiff's petition for certification was not a "final determination of [an] appeal by the appellate court" within the meaning of 51-197f.