Court Opinion

ID: 9752944
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-28 18:46:47.6444+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:27:26.167748
License: Public Domain

Murphy, J.
(concurring in the result). I concur in the opinion of the court that the Court of Common Pleas lacked jurisdiction of the appeal and that it should be dismissed.
I do not agree with the balance of the opinion, which is obiter dictum in its entirety. There is nothing in § 14-320 of the General Statutes which gives the commissioner the power to revoke his certificate of approval unless the location imperils the safety of the public, and there is nothing in the record to indicate that a peril to public safety existed when the present certificate was issued or when it was revoked. On the contrary, a department inspector inspected the site before the certificate was granted, and the site was approved.
We should not attempt to regulate by dictum the operations in the executive department. Sections 4-41 to 4-50 of the General Statutes govern the adoption of and operation under departmental regula*518tions. There is nothing in this record to show that any departmental regulations pertaining to gasoline stations were in effect in the motor vehicle department. The procedural rule, it may be observed parenthetically, relates to the dates of the certificate of the local authority and the application for a license, and not to the dates of the decision by the local authority to grant the application for a certificate of approval and the commissioner’s certificate of approval of location. The rule does not appear to be more than a guide established by one of the divisions within the department. There is no reference to the rule in the finding. It has nothing at all to do with the issues which the plaintiffs have raised.
In Styles v. Tyler, 64 Conn. 432, 450, 30 A. 165, we said that “[t]he ‘Supreme Court of Errors’ is not a supreme court for all purposes, but a supreme court only for the correction of errors in law.” We cited that case recently in Heiberger v. Clark, 148 Conn. 177, 189, 169 A.2d 652. We should confine our comments to matters that are germane to the questions of law presented on the appeal and not digress into areas where we are trespassers.