Legal Opinion

Musial v. State of Connecticut

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided September 24, 1935No. File #46433PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDickenson, J.

The plaintiff sued the State of Connecticut alone for the negligence of an alleged employee. The State answered that the alleged employee was not an employee for whose acts it was responsible. The plaintiff then was granted a motion to cite in the alleged employee. The officer set up in his return of this that it was impossible to make service upon the alleged employee as he had left the state and that “therefore under the statute” he sent to the defendant a copy of the complaint and citation addressed to his last known address by registered mail and left a copy with the Commissioner of Motor…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Hartley v. VitielloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  2. Coombs v. DarlingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  3. Safford v. Morris Metal Products Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
  4. Williams v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1857
  5. Woods v. LavittSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Jepsen v. Toni Co.Connecticut Superior Court · 1957
  2. Wilfred A. Lamothe v. Bessie GordonConnecticut Superior Court · 1948
  3. Haaberg v. SandersConnecticut Superior Court · 1967

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API