Legal Opinion
Rowland v. Hayes
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided April 6, 1938PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHinman, J.
The declaratory judgment sought in this action is to determine whether the plaintiff as comptroller of the city of Waterbury, or the defendant as mayor, has the right to appoint the assistants, clerks and stenographers in the office of the comptroller, and to remove them for cause. The judgment rendered was that the plaintiff has authority to appoint and remove his assistants and the defendant has no authority to appoint them but may order their removal for cause. The soundness of the conclusions that the plaintiff and not the defendant has this authority is the ultimate issue on this appeal.
T…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bridgeman v. City of DerbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Richmond v. City of NorwichSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- Mayor, Etc., of N.Y. v. . SandsNew York Court of Appeals · 1887
- State Ex Rel. Stage v. MacKieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909
- Bridgeport Brass Co. v. DrewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Perretta v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Town of Wallingford v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
- Attruia v. AttruiaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
- McAdams v. BarbieriSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
- McAdams v. BarbieriSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.