Warden of Bridgeport v. Hubbell
Supreme Court of Connecticut
IN ERROR. In February, 1820, David Hubbell jun. and others brought a petition against the town of Stratford, for a highway within the limits of the borough of Bridgeport in that town, returnable to the county court of Fairfield county, stating such highway to be of common convenience and necessity.
Read the full summary
IN ERROR. In February, 1820, David Hubbell jun. and others brought a petition against the town of Stratford, for a highway within the limits of the borough of Bridgeport in that town, returnable to the county court of Fairfield county, stating such highway to be of common convenience and necessity. A committee were appointed, who made their report to the term of the court in April, 1820, in which they found the road prayed for to be of' common convenience and necessity, and then laid it out, assessing the damages done to individuals at 136 dollars, 50 cents, and stating their own fees at 18…
1Opinion of the Court
Hosmer, Ch. J.
Two general objections have been made to the determination of the county court.
1. It is said, the law enforced against Bridgeport is void, being unconstitutional, retrospective and incompatible with the chartered rights of corporations.
No clause in the constitution of the United States, or of this state, has been cited, which prohibits the act of the legislature now in question. An act ex post facto relates to crimes only ; it is, emphatically, the making of an innocent action criminal; and the expression is never applicable to a law creating a civil obligation. Calder & ux. v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Inhabitants of Goshen v. Inhabitants of StoningtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1822
3Cited by13 opinions
- Abed v. Commissioner of CorrectionConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Chambers v. LoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Bankers Trust Co. v. BlodgettSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1921
- National Fireproofing Co. v. Town of HuntingtonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1909
- Mechanics' & Working-Men's Mutual Savings Bank & Building Ass'n v. AllenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1859
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.