Legal Opinion

Romanov v. Dental Commission

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 4, 1955PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWynne, J.

In this action the plaintiff seeks to-enjoin the state dental commission from holding a. hearing on charges preferred against him. Named as defendants are the dental commission and its-members, all of whom will be hereinafter referred to-as the defendants. The issues were found for the defendants, and the plaintiff has appealed from the-judgment. Error is assigned in the court’s action (1) in reaching the conclusions stated in the finding,, and (2) in overruling the plaintiff’s claims of law.

The facts may be summarized as follows: The-plaintiff is a duly licensed dentist in practice in…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Missouri Ex Rel. Hurwitz v. NorthSupreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. State v. PeckSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
  3. Legat v. AdornoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
  4. Reardon v. Dental CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1941

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Obuchowski v. Dental CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
  2. Simmons v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
  3. Hayes Family Ltd. Partnership v. Planning & Zoning CommissionConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
  4. General Motors Acceptance Corporation v. CironeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API