Legal Opinion

Carl Roessler, Inc. v. Ives

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided February 9, 1968PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRyan, J.

The plaintiff brought this action, seeking a declaratory judgment determining the respective rights of the parties following the filing by the defendant of an amended notice of condemnation which would reduce the original area of acquisition and which by its terms would require the plaintiff to accept a release of that portion or area by which the defendant desires to reduce his acquisition. Upon a stipulation of facts, the trial court reserved the questions presented for the advice of this court.

The parties have stipulated to the following facts: The defendant, as highway commissioner, was…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Seaboard Air Line Railway Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  2. United States v. DowSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  3. United States v. LynahSupreme Court of the United States · 1903
  4. Albert Hanson Lumber Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  5. United States v. RogersSupreme Court of the United States · 1921

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Textron, Inc. v. WoodSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1974
  2. Little v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
  3. Slavitt v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  4. DeMello v. Town of PlainvilleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
  5. Laurel, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API