Legal Opinion
Ajello v. Moffie
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 11, 1979PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Per curiam
In the summer of 1976, the plaintiff, Carl R. Ajello, attorney general, had reasonable cause to believe that the defendant, Harold J. Moffie, the then president of the Connecticut Association of Health Care Facilities, Inc., had written a letter to the members of the association urging them to boycott state-supported patients. Thereafter, pursuant to the provisions of § 35-42 of the General Statutes,1 *325the attorney general caused to be served upon Harold J. Moffie a subpoena duces tecum and ad testificandum.2
Upon being served Moffie informed the attorney general that he would not comply with…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. WallingSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- United States v. LaSalle National BankSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 94,017 Securities and Exchange Commission, and Cross-Appellant v. Brigadoon Scotch Distributing Co., and Cross-AppelleesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
- NEW ORLEANS PUBLIC SERVICE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. William H. BROWN, III, Chairman, Et Al., Etc., Defendants-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1975
3Cited by15 opinions
- Heslin v. Connecticut Law Clinic of Trantolo & TrantoloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Blumenthal v. Kimber Manufacturing, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- CUNA Mutual Insurance Society v. Attorney GeneralMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1980
- Brown and Brown, Inc. v. BlumenthalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Archdiocesan School OfficeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.