Legal Opinion
Town of West Hartford v. MURTHA CULLINA
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided September 14, 2004No. AC 25062PublishedCited by 18 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
BISHOP, J.
The plaintiff, the town of West Hartford, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered after the court granted motions filed by the defendants, Murtha Cullina, LLP (Murtha Cullina) and Hawkins, Delafield and Wood (Hawkins Delafield), to dismiss for lack of standing. On appeal the plaintiff claims that the court (1) improperly dismissed its complaint for lack of standing, (2) deprived it of due process by denying its motion for an evidentiary hearing and (3) improperly denied its motion for a continuance and discovery. We affirm the judgment of the court.
The following…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Standard Tallow Corp. v. JowdySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Gentile v. AltermattSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Fort Trumbull Conservancy, LLC v. AlvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Ganim v. Smith & Wesson Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Vacco v. Microsoft Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Town of New Hartford v. Connecticut Resources Recovery AuthoritySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2009
- Coss v. StewardConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Kondrat v. Town of BrookfieldConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Meghan Forrett v. Orion StoneSupreme Court of Vermont · 2021
- Weihing v. DodsworthConnecticut Appellate Court · 2007
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.