Argued
January 22, 2019
Procedural
History
Action
for, inter alia, a temporary and permanent injunction
prohibiting the defendants from operating an asphalt plant,
and for other relief, brought to the Superior Court in the
judicial district of New London and transferred to the
Superior Court in the judicial district of New London at
Norwich, where the court, Hendel, J., granted the
defendants' motion to consolidate this action with an
appeal filed by the defendants from a decision by the Zoning
Board of Appeals of the Town of Griswold denying an appeal
from a cease and desist order; thereafter, the court,
Booth, J., granted the defendants' motion to
substitute Pasquale Camputaro, Jr., executor of the estate of
Pasquale Camputaro, as a defendant; subsequently, the court,
Handy, J., rendered judgment in accordance with a
stipulation of the parties; thereafter, the case was
transferred to the Superior Court in the judicial district of
New London; subsequently, the court, Cosgrove, J.,
granted the defendants' motion to cite in American
Industries, Inc., as a defendant and the parties' joint
motion to open and modify the judgment; thereafter, the
court, Vacchelli, J., denied the motions to
intervene filed by Kathryn B. Londe and Jeffrey Ryan, and the
proposed intervenors appealed to the Appellate Court,
Lavine, Mullins and Mihalakos, Js., which
reversed the trial court's denial of the motions to
intervene and remanded the case for further proceedings, and
the plaintiff and the defendant Pasquale Camputaro, Jr.,
executor of the estate of Pasquale Camputaro, et al., on the
granting of certification, filed a joint appeal with this
court. Affirmed.
Harry
B. Heller, with whom, on the brief, was Mark K. Branse, for
the appellants (plaintiff and defendant Pasquale Camputaro,
Jr.).
Derek
V. Oatis, for the appellees (proposed inter-venors).
Robinson, C. J., and Palmer, McDonald, D'Auria, Kahn,
Ecker and Vertefeuille, Js.
OPINION
PER
CURIAM.
This
certified appeal arises from a consolidated zoning appeal and
enforcement action relating to a manufacturing facility
located in Jewett City, which had been subject to a
long-standing stipulated judgment imposing various
restrictions on its operation since 1997 (1997 stipulated
judgment). After a short calendar hearing held on November
16, 2015, the trial court opened and modified the 1997
stipulated judgment by agreement of the parties. The issue on
appeal concerns the fact that the public had been informed
that the parties' joint motion to open and modify the
judgment would not beheard until one week later, at a short
calendar hearing scheduled to occur on November 23, 2015. A
landowner who resides near the manufacturing facility,
Kathryn B. Londé, appeared at the publicly noticed
short calendar hearing on November 23, 2015, intending to a
file a motion to intervene pursuant to General Statutes
§ 22a-19[1] for the purpose of raising claims of
environmental harm, only to learn that the hearing had
occurred one week earlier and that the 1997 stipulated
judgment already had been modified. Londé nonetheless
filed her motion to intervene. On December 9, 2015, another
proposed intervenor, Jeffrey Ryan, also filed a motion to
intervene pursuant to § 22a-19, alleging environmental
harm. The trial court denied the motions to intervene as
untimely.
Londé
and Ryan (proposed intervenors) appealed to the Appellate
Court, which reversed the judgment of the trial court.
Griswold v. Camputaro, 177 Conn.App. 779, 802, 173
A.3d 959 (2017). The Appellate Court concluded that the trial
court's expedited consideration of the parties' joint
motion to open and modify the 1997 stipulated judgment
‘‘violated our rules of practice, ''
‘‘violated the [proposed] intervenors' right
to timely, accurate notice, '' and denied
the proposed intervenors ‘‘their statutory
right[s] to intervene pursuant to § 22a-19 (a)''
and to ‘‘participate in the hearing on the
stipulated settlement'' pursuant to General Statutes
§ 8-8 (n). (Emphasis in original.) Id., 796,
799. We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court.
The
record reflects the following relevant facts and procedural
history. Pasquale Camputaro owned and operated an asphalt
manufacturing facility, American Sand & Gravel, Inc.,
located at 630 Plainfield Road in Jewett City. On December 2,
1994, the Planning and Zoning Commission of the Town of
Griswold issued a cease and desist order directing the
original defendants-Pasquale Camputaro and American Sand
& Gravel, Inc.[2]-to discontinue the use and operation of
the property as an asphalt manufacturing facility. The
original defendants moved to dismiss the cease and desist
order, but their motion was denied. The original defendants
subsequently filed an appeal with the Griswold Zoning Board
of Appeals, which refused to consider the appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. They then filed an appeal in the Superior Court
(administrative appeal).
In the
meantime, on January 10, 1995, the plaintiff, the town of
Griswold (town), filed a complaint and request for injunctive
relief against the original defendants, alleging that the
operation of the property as an asphalt manufacturing
facility violated the town's zoning regulations (zoning
enforcement action). The original defendants responded that
their use of the property predated the zoning regulations
and, therefore, was a valid preexisting nonconforming use.
The trial court consolidated the original defendants'
administrative appeal with the town's zoning enforcement
action.
In
1997, Camputaro died, and his son and executor of his estate,
Pasquale Camputaro, Jr., was substituted as a defendant. Soon
thereafter, the parties reached a settlement, and the 1997
stipulated judgment was approved by the court on August 4,
1997.
Approximately
seventeen years later, the town began to receive complaints
that the operation of the asphalt manufacturing facility
violated the 1997 stipulated judgment. Although there had
been no activity in the case since the entry of the 1997
stipulated judgment, Camputaro, Jr., moved on October 28,
2015 to cite in American Industries, Inc., which is the
operator of the asphalt manufacturing facility, as an
additional party because it ‘‘has been an
integral party responsible for the compliance with''
the 1997 stipulated judgment. Camputaro, Jr., also filed a
second motion to substitute himself as a defendant for
Pasquale Camputaro.
On
November 12, 2015, the parties filed a joint motion to open
and modify the 1997stipulated judgment. As pertinent to this
appeal, the proposed modified judgment included changes to
‘‘the restrictions on the operation'' of
the asphalt manufacturing facility ‘‘[i]n
recognition of the fact that governmental projects now
require that paving occur during nighttime hours . . .
.'' Most significantly, the modified judgment
permitted the asphalt manufacturing facility more than twice
the amount of ‘‘extra operating hours''
per year.[3] The clerk of the court ...