Opinion ID: 657166
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Certification to the Connecticut Supreme Court

Text: 10 In its Sec. 1292(b) certification to us, the district court formulated the controlling question of law as: whether the state of Connecticut recognizes avigation easements acquired by prescription and, if so, whether it would include a clearance easement and what its dimensions would be. Noting the absence of controlling precedent in Connecticut on the issues presented and the potential effect a decision might have on the property rights of Connecticut residents, we agreed with the suggestion of amicus Attorney General of the State of Connecticut that the questions of state law referred to above should in turn be certified to the Connecticut Supreme Court. Certification to that court respects Connecticut's strong interest in deciding those questions rather than having the only precedent on point be that of the federal court, which may be mistaken. Home Ins. Co. v. American Home Prods. Corp., 873 F.2d 520, 522 (2d Cir.1989). 11 By order dated January 6, 1993, we certified the following questions of law to the Connecticut Supreme Court: 12
13 2. If under Connecticut law a clearance easement is distinct from an avigation easement, can a clearance easement be acquired by prescription in the State of Connecticut? 14 3. Whether conceived as incident to an avigation easement or as constituting a separate clearance easement, would a clear zone include whatever air space is necessary to use the easement? See 986 F.2d at 627. 15 The Connecticut Supreme Court accepted certification, and heard oral argument in April 1993. In a decision released July 28, 1993, the Connecticut Supreme Court responded to the certification. 227 Conn. 495, 629 A.2d 1084 (1993).