Legal Opinion
Butterfield v. Brady
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 5, 1930PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, J.
The defendant pleads in abatement to the writ of replevin because the recognizance entered into upon the issuance of the writ was (1) before a commissioner of the Superior Court for New Haven County who was not the authority who signed the writ, and (2) was not signed by the obligors in the presence of at least one witness other than the authority taking the recognizance, nor in the presence of the commissioner of the Superior Court taking the recognizance.
Section 6094 of the General Statutes provides: “No writ of replevin shall be issued . . . until some person, known to the authority…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Sauskelonis v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- Ives v. FinchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1852
- Douglass v. UnmackSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1904
3Cited by7 opinions
- Sheehan v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Brown v. CatoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960
- D'Andrea v. RendeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
- Corden v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
- Manning v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.