Legal Opinion
State v. Erickson
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 9, 1926PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, J.
In State ex rel. Foote v. Bartholomew, 103 Conn. 607, 132 Atl. 30, we sustained the right of the State to a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the board of relief of Branford to place upon the assessment list of that town certain property which the assessors had omitted. The present action concerns the assessment of the same property in the succeeding year, and consists of an application for a peremptory writ of mandamus against the assessors of the town. The gist of the complaint is that, the owner of the property having failed to file a tax list, the assessors, in adding the property to…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Foote v. BartholomewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Cook v. Packard Motor Car Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1914
- Dalley v. City of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1891
- State Board of Equalization v. People ex rel. GogginIllinois Supreme Court · 1901
- Council of Glencoe v. People ex rel. OwenIllinois Supreme Court · 1875
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Vartuli v. SotireSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Pierce v. GreenSupreme Court of Iowa · 1940
- State Ex Rel. Heimov v. ThomsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- Connecticut Savings Bank v. First National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1947
- Montgomery v. Town of BranfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.