Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

White v. Latimer Point Condominium Association, Inc.

Appellate Court of Connecticut

August 13, 2019

Peter WHITE
v.
LATIMER POINT CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., et al.

         Argued March 18, 2019

         Appeal from Superior Court, New London District, Joseph Q. Koletsky, J.

Page 831

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 832

          Vincent John Purnhagen, South Windsor, for the appellant (plaintiff).

         Robert B. Flynn, Hartford, for the appellees (defendants).

         Keller, Bright and Flynn, Js.

          OPINION

         BRIGHT, J.

         [191 Conn.App. 768] The plaintiff, Peter White, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, ruling in favor of the defendants, Latimer Point Condominium Association, Inc., (association), and Gennaro Modugno and Elizabeth Modugno, whom we collectively refer to as the [191 Conn.App. 769] Modugnos, on the plaintiff’s complaint, which was brought pursuant to General Statutes § 47-278.[1] On [191 Conn.App. 770] appeal,

Page 833

the plaintiff claims that the court misapplied and disregarded relevant case law, that it failed to apply properly the 10 percent rule contained in the association’s bylaws,[2] that it ignored overwhelming evidence that the association failed to comply with its tree trimming schedule, and that it rendered a judgment that is neither legally correct nor factually supported by the record. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

         The record reveals the following uncontested facts and procedural history, which are relevant to the plaintiff’s appeal. The plaintiff is the owner of unit 23 at the Latimer Point Condominiums (Latimer), a common interest ownership community established pursuant to General Statutes § 47-200 et seq. Latimer is situated on Fishers Island Sound in Stonington. The Modugnos are owners of unit 7 at Latimer. Unit 7 is situated between unit 23 and Fishers Island Sound. All of the unit owners at Latimer are organized as the association, and the association is governed by a board of directors (board). The association, pursuant to Article XIV of its bylaws, has in place an Architectural Control Committee (committee) that is staffed and managed by volunteers.

          Because of extensive storm damage to unit 7, the Modugnos applied for approval from the committee to build a new home, elevated in height, to meet the new Federal Emergency Management Agency building standards and the town of Stonington’s zoning regulations. The plaintiff objected to the application on the ground [191 Conn.App. 771] that the new home would interfere substantially with his water view, by obstructing that view by more than the 10 percent allowed under the bylaws. In particular, § 14.1.2 of the bylaws provides, in relevant part, that the association "shall ensure that no member’s water view shall ever be diminished by more than 10 [percent] due to cumulative constructions of other units and/or the association, without the written consent of such member(s) .... In the event any unit’s water view is increased by action pursuant to [§ ] 14.2, or other means, such increase shall be included in the 10 [percent] determination." Section 14.2 provides, in relevant part, that "in order to reasonably ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.