Legal Opinion
Carabetta v. City of Meriden
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided June 10, 1958PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, J.
This action is grounded upon nuisance. The term “nuisance” defies concise definition suitable for general use. It has been called “a catchall of ill-defined rights.” Gonchar v. Kelson, 114 Conn. 262, 271, 158 A. 545. The essential element of the concept of nuisance is a continuing inherent or natural tendency to create danger and inflict injury. Laspino v. New Haven, 135 Conn. 603, 604, 67 A.2d 557; Hoffman v. Bristol, 113 Conn. 386, 389, 155 A. 499. Whether this element is present depends upon all the pertinent circumstances of a given situation. Balaas v. Hartford, 126 Conn. 510, 514, 12…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Hoffman v. City of BristolSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
- Beckwith v. Town of StratfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- Bacon v. Town of Rocky HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Scott v. ScottSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1910
- Rutt v. RocheSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Ganim v. Smith & Wesson Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- Fraser v. HenningerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Kostyal v. CassSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Chazen v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Cyr v. Town of BrookfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1965
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.