Legal Opinion
Sokaitis v. Bakaysa
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 11, 2009No. SC 18130PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
ZARELLA, J.
The dispositive issue in this certified 1 appeal is whether General Statutes § 52-553 2 applies to, and makes void, a contract entered into by the plaintiff, Theresa Sokaitis, and the defendant, Rose Bakaysa, to share equally the proceeds of their legal gambling activities. On appeal, the defendant challenges the Appellate Court’s determination that the contract between the parties was not covered by § 52-553. We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Court.
The following undisputed factual and procedural history, as set forth in the Appellate Court’s opinion, are relevant to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Bellemare v. Wachovia Mortgage Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Friezo v. FriezoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Stone-Krete Construction, Inc. v. EderSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2006
- Connelly v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- Ciampittiello v. CampitelloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1947
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Grady v. Town of SomersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Weiss v. WeissSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- MGM Resorts International Global Gaming Development, LLC v. MalloyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 2017
- Blackford v. Prairie Meadows Racetrack & Casino, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2010
- Doe v. Town of W. HartfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.