Legal Opinion
Shawmut Bank, N.A. v. Valley Farms
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 9, 1992No. 14411PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
The principal issue in this appeal is the constitutionality, under the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution, of our statutory scheme regarding the action of *362replevin codified in General Statutes § 52-515 et seq. The defendant partnerships, Valley Farms, Maple Shade Farms, Starr Farms and REM Motor Rental, appeal1 from the judgment of the trial court granting the application of the plaintiff, Shawmut Bank, N.A.,2 for a prejudgment remedy of replevin of certain property of the defendants. The defendants claim that: (1) the statutory scheme authorizing…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. SalernoSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay ViewSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Mitchell v. W. T. Grant Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Schall v. MartinSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Roth v. WestonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- Ramos v. Town of VernonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2000
- Sassone v. LeporeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Calfee v. UsmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Kopalchick v. Catholic Diocese of RichmondSupreme Court of Virginia · 2007
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.