Legal Opinion

Griswold v. Kelly

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided January 19, 1954PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWTirnB, J.

The facts in this case are set forth in the stipulation. The plaintiff is a man whose character and reputation are beyond reproach. He is a suitable person within the meaning of the Liquor Control Act. For over thirty years he has owned and conducted a grocery store on Main Street in the town of Old Lyme. Since April, 1934, he has owned a package store in the same building and has been the licensed permittee thereof. His practice has been to keep the package store locked and to open it only when a customer approached it. He would leave the grocery, unlock the front door of the package store,…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Loglisci v. Liquor Control CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  2. Beckanstin v. Liquor Control CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. U.S. Vision, Inc. v. Board of ExaminersConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
  2. Dadiskos v. Liquor Control CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
  3. Griswold v. KellySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1954

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

Powered by the Exa API