Legal Opinion
Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities Ex Rel. Arnold v. Forvil
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 30, 2011No. SC 18500PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HARPER, J.
The defendants, Jean M. Forvil and Vic-toire Forvil, appeal from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a trial to the court, in favor of the plaintiff, the commission on human rights and opportunities (commission), assessing a fine to be paid to the commis sion and awarding damages to Fanetta Arnold and her two minor children (relators) 1 for the defendants’ refusal to rent housing to the relators on the basis of a “lawful source of income” in violation of General Statutes § 46a-64c (a). 2 The defendants raise numerous claims, challenging, inter alia, the trial…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Price Waterhouse v. HopkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Carey v. PiphusSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Carrol v. Allstate InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Buckman v. People Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Jerome Seaton and Gladys Seaton, His Wife v. Sky Realty Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1974
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Grimm v. FoxSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2012
- Tomick v. United Parcel Service, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2012
- Wilcox v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2012
- Gleason v. SmolinskiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2014
- Midland Funding, LLC v. TrippConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.