Legal Opinion

Burr v. Rago

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 27, 1935PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHaines, J.

This appeal is taken by the named plaintiff and thirty-five others, all of whom on September 4th, 1934, owned property adjacent to or in the vicinity of the northwest corner of Marshall Street and Farmington Avenue in the city of Hartford known as No. 300 Farmington Avenue. This plot was owned by the estate of Emma S. D. Parker deceased, and is located in “Business Zone No. 1” as set forth in the zoning ordinances' of Hartford. Such material facts as are referred to in the following discussion are from the finding with such additions from the draft-finding as we deem warranted by the evidence…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. St. Patrick's Church Corporation v. DanielsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1931
  2. Perdue v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
  3. Chicago &. N. W. Ry. Co. v. Railroad & Warehouse CommissionDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1922
  4. McGarry v. WalshAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1925
  5. Langberg v. WagnerNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1927

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Board of Zoning Appeals v. McKinneyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1938
  2. Strain v. MimsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
  3. Watson v. HowardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
  4. Waterbury Savings Bank v. DanaherSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
  5. Whittle v. Board of Zoning AppealsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1956

27 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