Legal Opinion
Doeltz v. Longshore, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided May 1, 1940PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
The plaintiff ran a refreshment concession on the premises of the defendant. He claimed that the defendant failed to furnish the agreed accessories, interfered with his business and converted certain personal property belonging to him. The defendant denied this and made counter charges. The defendant appealed from the denial of its motion to set aside a plaintiff’s verdict.
The evidence, considered in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, discloses the following situation in so far as the decisive question in the case is concerned. The defendant ran a country and beach club.. There was a…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Howard v. Stillwell & Bierce Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1891
- Ball v. T. J. Pardy Construction Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- Goebel v. HoughSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1879
- Horvath v. TontiniSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Narragansett Amusement Co. v. Riverside Park Amusement Co.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1927
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Bead Chain Manufacturing Co. v. Saxton Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- West Haven Sound Development Corp. v. City of West HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Proto v. Bridgeport Herald CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Burr v. LichtenheimSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Mazzucco v. Krall Coal & Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.