Legal Opinion
Herzig v. Horrigan
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 3, 1994No. 12450PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtDupont, C. J.
The plaintiff appeals from the judgment of the trial court dissolving a garnishment and property execution served on agents of the state of Connecticut. The plaintiff challenges the trial court’s conclusion that the doctrine of sovereign immunity bars the garnishment of a judgment debtor’s Lotto winnings. We affirm the decision of the trial court.
The plaintiff obtained a summary judgment in the amount of $13,100 against the named defendant Donald Horrigan1 for his failure to pay rent to the plaintiff. According to the plaintiff, the only asset of the defendant amenable to execution is the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State v. GoldingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Horton v. MeskillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Kawananakoa v. PolyblankSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- White v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Struckman v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Millward Brown, Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue ServicesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Asset Acceptance LLC v. Utah State TreasurerCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2016
- Gould v. City of HartfordConnecticut Superior Court · 1995
- Lipwich v. FrankelConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
- Segal v. SegalConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.