Weil v. Beresth
Connecticut Superior Court
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
- Reiner v. Arthur Murray, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1966
3Cited by1 opinion
- Goldfeld v. Wood Park Estates, Inc.Connecticut Superior Court · 1971