Conn. Gen. Stat. » Title 22a — ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION · Chapter 439 — Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. State Policy

Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-14

Short title: Environmental Protection Act of 1971

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CT-CGAcga.ct.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sections 22a-14 to 22a-20, inclusive, shall be known and may be cited as the “Environmental Protection Act of 1971”.

(1971, P.A. 96, S. 1.)

Cited. 170 C. 47; 175 C. 483; 184 C. 51; 192 C. 591; 204 C. 38; Id., 212; 212 C. 710; Id., 727; 215 C. 474; 218 C. 580; 220 C. 54; 222 C. 98; 226 C. 205; Id., 579; 234 C. 488; 237 C. 135; 239 C. 786. Plaintiff, a limited liability company formed, among other reasons, “to preserve, conserve, maintain and protect the continuity, historic importance, environment and legal status” of the Fort Trumbull, New London area, had statutory standing to bring an action against defendants. 282 C. 791.

Cited. 30 CA 204; 41 CA 89; Id., 120.

Cited. 35 CS 145.

(Return to Chapter
Table of Contents)		 (Return to
List of Chapters)		 (Return to
List of Titles)

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 74 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1974–2026 · leading case: Nizzardo v. State Traffic Commission
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Nizzardo v. State Traffic Commission (2002) conn · cites it 16× “The act is codified at General Statutes §§ 22a-14 through 22a-20.”
Avalonbay Communities, Inc. v. Zoning Commission (2006) conn · cites it 8× “The issue presented in these certified appeals is whether a municipality, acting through its town council, can intervene in appeals to the Superior Court from decisions of the municipality's inland wetlands and watercourses agency and its zoning commission pursuant to General…”
Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. Alves (2003) conn · cites it 4× “The defendants filed motions to dismiss the plaintiffs complaint, claiming that the plaintiff lacked standing under the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act *484 (act), General Statutes § 22a-14 et seq., and that the plaintiff was not otherwise classically or statutorily…”
Keeney v. Town of Old Saybrook (1996) conn · cites it 6× “In counts five and seven, the complaint alleged that Old Saybrook had violated the Environmental Protection Act, General Statutes § 22a-14 et seq., 6 by causing “unreasonable pollution, impairment or destruction of the water and other natural resources of the state” through its…”
Mystic Marinelife Aquarium, Inc. v. Gill (1978) conn · cites it 4× “This plaintiff claims standing as an aggrieved person because of the provisions of the EPA, General Statutes §§ 22a-14 to 22a-20, inclusive.”
Avalonbay Communities, Inc. v. Zoning Commission (2005) connappct · cites it 8× “The primary question presented is whether the citizen intervention provision of Connecticut's Environmental Protection Act of 1971(EPA), General Statutes §§ 22a-14 to 22a-20, may be invoked by a town's legislative body in the context of judicial review of the denial of…”
Burton v. Dept. of Environmental Protection (2021) conn · cites it 3× “The plaintiff, Nancy Burton, brought an action under the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act of 1971 (CEPA), General Statutes § 22a-14 et seq., against the defendants, the Commissioner of Environmental Pro- tection1 and Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.”
Manchester Environmental Coalition v. Stockton (1981) conn · cites it 4× “General Statutes §§ 22a-14 through 22a-20.”
Burton v. COM'R OF ENV. PROTECTION (2009) conn · cites it 4× “(Dominion), claiming that the operation of the Millstone Nuclear Power Station (Millstone), which is owned and operated by Dominion, is causing unreasonable pollution of the waters of the state in violation of the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, General Statutes §…”
City of Waterbury v. Town of Washington (2002) conn · cites it 2× “In its appeal, Waterbury claims that the trial court improperly concluded that: (1) Waterbury violated the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act (CEPA), General Statutes § 22a-14 et seq.; (2) the relief granted under CEPA did not constitute a taking of Waterbury’s vested…”
Finley v. INLAND WETLANDS COM'N OF TOWN OF ORANGE (2008) conn · cites it 4× “*581 The commissioner then filed a motion to dismiss Mystic Seaport's appeal on the ground that the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act of 1971, General Statutes § 22a-14 et seq., "does not contain any legislative pronouncement that a person can bring an appeal in the first…”
Samperi v. Inland Wetlands Agency (1993) conn · cites it 2× “” We see no value in requiring an inland wetlands agency to make such a ritualistic assertion that would add nothing to the reviewing court’s search of the record for substantial evidence to support an inland wetlands agency’s determination.”
Show all 74 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.