Legal Opinion
Prudential Mortgage & Investment Co. v. City of New Britain
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 9, 1937PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.
The facts stipulated for this reservation include the following: The plaintiff brought a civil action for damages against George A. Quigley wherein, upon the original writ and upon several subsequent orders for further attachment, the defendant was garnisheed. When this garnishee process was served Quigley was the duly elected and qualified mayor of the defendant city, engaged in the performance of his office, and a substantial sum was due to him from the defendant, as provided by ordinance, wholly for salary in administering this office. The defendant made no disclosure. The plaintiff…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Sibley v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- New Haven Steam Saw-Mill Co. v. FowlerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
- Gager v. WatsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1836
- Kelly v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Seymour v. Over-River School DistrictSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1886
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Perretta v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Maturo v. State Employees Retirement CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2017
- In re DeanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- City of Hartford v. TuckerConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Dap Financial Management Co. v. Dean, No. Cv940318636 (Aug. 9, 1996)Connecticut Superior Court · 1996
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.