Peterson v. iCare Management, LLC

Syllabus

The plaintiff property owners in Rocky Hill sought to recover damages from the defendants for, inter alia, alleged private nuisance, in connection with the defendants' operation of a nursing home facility for prison inmates on a neighboring property. The town of Rocky Hill had brought several prior related actions against the defendants based on their pro- posed use of the property as a nursing care facility for prison inmates, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief and alleging violations of the town's zoning regulations. Those actions were consolidated and tried to the court, which rendered judgment in favor of the defendants, holding that the defendants' use of the property was a preexisting, nonconform- ing use and was not in violation of the zoning regulations. The plaintiffs thereafter commenced the underlying actions, seeking damages and a declaration from the court that the defendant could not operate the nursing home facility at the property. The defendants moved for sum- mary judgment, claiming that the plaintiffs' claims were barred by the principles of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel based on the court's prior judgment rendered in the litigation involving the town. The trial court denied the defendants' motions for summary judgment, holding that neither res judicata nor collateral estoppel applied because the claims and issues previously litigated were not sufficiently identical to those presented in the underlying actions. From the judgments rendered thereon, the defendants appealed to this court. Held: 1. The defendants could not prevail on their claim that the trial court erred in denying their motions for summary judgment because the plaintiffs' claims were barred by res judicata: the trial court aptly rejected the defendants' argument that the court's conclusion in the prior litigation that the defendants did not violate the town's zoning regulations bars the plaintiffs' claims in the underlying actions, because, as that court stated, the