Legal Opinion

Verraster v. Tynan

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 1, 1965PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHouse, J.

In this action, the plaintiffs allege that § 14-1 (47) of the General Statutes is invalid and void. They pray by way of affirmative and coercive relief an injunction restraining the defendant motor vehicles commissioner from acting pursuant to its provisions. They also claim “ [a] declaratory judgment determining: a. Whether the said statute is valid and binding or whether said statute is invalid, null and void, 1. Under the provisions of the Constitution of the United States of America, 2. Under the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut, 3. Whether or not the…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Morici v. JarvieSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
  2. Lerner Shops of Connecticut, Inc. v. Town of WaterburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
  3. Vitale v. GargiuloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
  4. Cochran v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
  5. Wiegert v. Pequabuck Golf Club, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1963

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. United Oil Co. v. Urban Redevelopment CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
  2. National Broadcasting Co. v. RoseSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
  3. Brill v. UlreySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
  4. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. v. Indomar, Ltd.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
  5. Wilson v. JeffersonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006

4 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