Legal Opinion

Estey v. Mawdsley

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided January 7, 1966No. File No. CV 14-655-16644PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKinmonth, J.

This action was brought under § 52-435 of the General Statutes.1 The issues were *492found for the plaintiff, and the defendant has appealed, assigning error in the court’s finding and in its conclusion that a married woman could maintain a cause of action under the statute. The defendant abandoned his attack on the finding, and the only question before us is whether a married woman can maintain a cause of action under the statute in effect when this action was commenced.

The facts essential to the question before us may be briefly stated as follows: The plaintiff separated from her husband in…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Higgins v. Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  2. City of Hartford v. Town of SuffieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
  3. Southern New England Telephone Co. v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1957
  4. Evans v. State ex rel. FreemanIndiana Supreme Court · 1905
  5. State ex rel. Reynolds v. FlynnWisconsin Supreme Court · 1923

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Wilkins v. Department of Human ResourcesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1985
  2. J.A.S. v. BushelmanKentucky Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Perkins v. PerkinsConnecticut Superior Court · 1977
  4. Lewis v. SchneiderColorado Court of Appeals · 1994
  5. Evans v. WilsonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2004

2 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