Legal Opinion
Citino v. Redevelopment Agency
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 15, 1998No. AC 16900PublishedCited by 41 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DUPONT, J.
The two main issues of this appeal are (1) whether the plaintiff, Frank A. Citino, was entitled to a judgment against the defendant Hartford redevelopment agency for alleged misrepresentations made by the defendant to the plaintiff and (2) whether the doctrine of inverse condemnation requires the conclusion that the plaintiffs real estate was taken for a public use by the defendant without just compensation in violation of the fifth and fourteenth amendments to the United States constitution and article first, § 11, of the Connecticut constitution.
The trial court did not rely…
2Cases cited41 opinions
- United States v. CausbySupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Gordon v. Bridgeport Housing AuthoritySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- D'Ulisse-Cupo v. Board of Directors of Notre Dame High SchoolSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Haynes v. Yale-New Haven HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
- Beverly Hills Concepts, Inc. v. Schatz & Schatz, Ribicoff & KotkinSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by41 opinions
- Glazer v. Dress Barn, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2005
- Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of GrotonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- City of Bristol v. Tilcon Minerals, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- Vertrue Inc. v. MeshkinDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2006
- Kaczynski v. KaczynskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
36 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.