Clark v. Town of Cornwall
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Suit to secure relief from the attempted discontinuance of certain highways in the defendant town, brought to the Superior Court in Litchfield County where, upon motion of the defendant Cunningham, a committee was appointed, pursuant to §§ 1434 and 1442 of the General Statutes, to determine the question of the common convenience and necessity of said highways (Reed, J.), and from this judgment the defendant town appealed.
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The defendants, the Town of Cornwall and Cunningham, admitted in their answers to the complaint that there were two sections of a highway in Cornwall; that the selectmen of Cornwall duly warned a special meeting of the legal voters of that town, by notice dated June 8th, to take action on Juné 15th, to discontinue these portions of this high way. Pursuant to this warning and notice, the town meeting passed the following vote: “Voted, The vote upon closing the road or highway mentioned in the foregoing notice was taken as follows: 66 No, 67 Yes. Said vote was declared passed by the Chairman of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Greist v. AmrhynSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
- Welton v. Town of ThomastonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1892
- Estey v. StarrSupreme Court of Vermont · 1884
- City of New London v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Getchell v. Inhabitants of WellsSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1867
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Cone v. DarrowSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Osborn v. Zoning Board of Appeals of StamfordConnecticut Superior Court · 1943
- Doolittle v. Town of PrestonConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
- Savalle v. HILZINGERConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010