Legal Opinion
Ribicoff v. Division of Public Utility Control
Connecticut Superior Court
Decided October 15, 1980No. FILE Nos. 24430, 24549PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBorden, J.
These motions present the question of whether the plaintiffs, who are minority shareholders in corporations holding cable television franchises, have sufficiently alleged aggrievement so as to maintain these appeals from administrative orders which involve revocation of the franchises. See General Statutes § 4-183 (a). The court holds that they have not.
These two cases are appeals under the Uniform Administrative Procedure Act (UAPA), General Statutes §§ 4-166 through 4-189, from certain decisions of the defendant Division of Public Utility Control (DPUC) rendered in proceedings initiated by…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Flast v. CohenSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Pepper v. LittonSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Jane Perlman v. C. Russell Feldmann, Newport Steel CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1955
- Amodio v. CunninghamSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- New England Rehabilitation Hospital of Hartford, Inc. v. Commission on Hospitals & Health CareSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Water Pollution Control Authority v. KeeneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Park City Hospital v. Commission on Hospitals & Health CareConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
- Ribicoff v. Division of Public Utility ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1982
- Kelly v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, No. Cv90-701555 (Mar. 15, 1991)Connecticut Superior Court · 1991
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.