Bachman v. Fortuna
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Opinion of the CourtMurphy, J.
This action was instituted by seven plaintiffs, as joint and several promisees, upon an alleged promise of the defendants to prepare and improve a street upon which the plaintiffs had purchased building lots. Five of the plaintiffs withdrew, and the two remaining plaintiffs, Bachman and Sweetser, proceeded to trial upon an amended complaint. The trial court rendered judgment in favor of these plaintiffs, hereinafter referred to as the plaintiffs, to recover nominal damages from the defendant John Fortuna only. The plaintiffs have appealed.
Briefly stated, the facts are as follows: The…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Coughlin v. BlairCalifornia Supreme Court · 1953
- Dickerson v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1922
- Lee v. HarrisSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
- Wells v. AbernethySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1824
- Belisle v. Berkshire Ice Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1923
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Scribner v. O'Brien, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Lar-Rob Bus Corp. v. Town of FairfieldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1976
- Gordon v. Indusco Management Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Bertozzi v. McCarthySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- West Haven Sound Development Corp. v. City of West HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.