Legal Opinion
Szabo v. Beregszazy
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 23, 1986No. 4731PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Per curiam
In this case, the plaintiffs’ appeal from the Probate Court was made returnable to the incorrect judicial district. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the appeal because of improper venue.
The trial court, in granting the defendant’s motion to dismiss, stated in its memorandum of decision that *369probate appeals are purely statutory and are governed by General Statutes §§ 45-2881 and 45-290.2 Pursuant to these statutes, the court found that any defect in the form of an appeal, including improper venue, must be corrected by amendment within ninety days after the date of the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- City of Meriden v. Board of Tax ReviewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
- Budkofsky v. Commissioner of Motor VehiclesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Patry v. Board of TrusteesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Sprague v. Commission on Human RightsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
3Cited by5 opinions
- Reed v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
- Merry-Go-Round Enterprises, Inc. v. MolnarConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
- Archambault v. Water Pollution Control Authority of WaterfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 1987
- J G Glass Co. v. Hartford Fire Ins., No. Cv95 32 61 04 S (Sep. 6, 1996)Connecticut Superior Court · 1996
- Stauffer v. Manganello, No. Cv92 03 99 95 (Mar. 4, 1993)Connecticut Superior Court · 1993