Legal Opinion

Stulginski v. Cizauskas

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided March 8, 1939PublishedCited by 38 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBrown, J.

The complaint is for the foreclosure of a judgment lien upon the defendant’s land in Waterbury, filed to secure a judgment for the plaintiff against the defendant for $3248.54 and costs, rendered April 21, 1938. The defendant’s answer admits the allegations of the complaint except that the judgment had never been paid in whole or part, and alleges that: the judgment was rendered in an action for the defendant’s tort which inflicted physical injury during an altercation with the plaintiff, a fellow employee of the Waterbury Rolling Mills Company; this injury was sustained by the plaintiff in…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Washington Gas Light Co. v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Powers v. Hotel Bond Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
  3. Dwy v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
  4. Warax v. Cincinnati, N. O. & T. P. Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Kentucky · 1896
  5. Dickerson v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1922

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by38 opinions

  1. Larsen Chelsey Realty Co. v. LarsenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  2. Dodd v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  3. Graham v. WorthingtonSupreme Court of Iowa · 1966
  4. Ransom v. HanerAlaska Supreme Court · 1961
  5. United States v. AcordCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1954

33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API