Legal Opinion
McDonnell v. City of New Haven & New Haven City School District
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided July 27, 1923PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtCurtis, J.
The plaintiff claims that the court erred in sustaining the demurrer of the city, and in denying his motion for judgment against the school district.
The demurrer of the city is based fundamentally on the claim that under its charter the city is not liable for contracts alleged to have been made by or in be half of the defendant district and the city by the board of education. The motion for a judgment against the defendant district was denied upon two grounds: 1. That the defendant district has ceased to function. 2. That it is not alleged* that an appropriation has been made to pay the…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Town of Huntington v. Huntington Town School CommitteeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909
- Matter of Fuhrmann v. . GravesNew York Court of Appeals · 1923
- State ex rel. Walsh v. HineSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1890
- Gilman v. BassettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1866
- McLoud v. SelbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1835
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Groton & Stonington Traction Co. v. Town of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Carey v. City of HaleyvilleSupreme Court of Alabama · 1935
- Northrop v. Town of ClintonConnecticut Superior Court · 1946
- Board of Education (Stamford) v. Board of FinanceConnecticut Superior Court · 1937