Legal Opinion

Brown v. Novak

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided August 3, 1950No. File 11447Published

1Opinion of the CourtQuinlan, J.

The pleadings are basic in an arrival at the issues. McKenna v. Whipple, 97 Conn. 695, 702. Here reliance upon the assumption of a discontinuance of a public highway has been made, and the pleadings seem to rest upon a violation of a private right.

Originally the claim of discontinuance was as of 1868, which was later changed to 1923. In discontinuing a highway, the statutory method must be strictly followed; Greist v. Amrhyn, 80 Conn. 280; and the approbation of the town must be of the precise act of discontinuance made by the selectmen. This approbation “might be given before or after action…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Newton v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
  2. McKenna v. WhippleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
  3. Greist v. AmrhynSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
  4. Clark v. Town of SaybrookSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1851
  5. City of New London v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912

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