Conn. Gen. Stat. § 23-65
(1949 Rev., S. 3503; February, 1965, P.A. 614, S. 4, 5; 1969, P.A. 768, S. 251, 252, 253; P.A. 75-486, S. 56, 69; P.A. 77-614, S. 162, 610; P.A. 80-482, S. 179, 180, 348; P.A. 98-209, S. 17; 98-228, S. 8; P.A. 00-106, S. 1; P.A. 06-89, S. 3; P.A. 11-80, S. 1; P.A. 12-80, S. 149; P.A. 14-151, S. 4; P.A. 17-117, S. 1.)
Cited. 82 C. 394; 128 Conn. 674. In view of Supreme Court decision and statutes vesting exclusive control in town tree wardens over trees located in whole or in part in public roadways, court correctly held that owners of private, adjoining land were not liable to plaintiffs injured by falling tree, despite the fact that private landowners unintentionally created the condition that caused the tree to decay and fall, upon facts that demonstrated private landowners gave town timely notification of the decay before tree fell. 97 Conn.App. 31. Cited. 17 Conn.Supp. 108. Legislative intent was to vest exclusive control in tree warden of all trees standing within limits of highway and of any parts of trees extending within these limits. 3 Conn. Cir. Ct. 503. Subsec. (b): Selectmen cannot authorize such injury to a tree on the highway. 66 C. 569. "Appraised value" relates only to imposition of a fine and not to proper measure of damages for unlawful cutting of trees and shrubs. 75 CA 781.
See Sec. 52-560a re encroachment on open space land.