Legal Opinion

Weil v. Beresth

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided March 8, 1966No. File 143956PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtParskey, J.

Defendant Harrison raises two issues in his plea in abatement, (1) that § 33-322 of the General Statutes is not applicable to him, and (2) that if it is, the statute is unconstitutional. Since § 33-322 obviously applies to Harrison, the basis of his claim that it does not “is a puzzlement.” As for Harrison’s claim that Connecticut’s “long arm” statute contravenes the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution, his legal reasoning is more attuned to the days of the Model T than to the jet age. Harrison’s corporate contacts in the state are too numerous to be casual. Having used the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Reiner v. Arthur Murray, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1966

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Goldfeld v. Wood Park Estates, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API