Legal Opinion · Dissent

Town of Enfield v. Hamilton

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided November 17, 1930Published

1DissentHaines, J.

A statement of the reasons for my inability to concur in the conclusion of the majority, is justified by the fundamental character of the question upon which we differ. This question has its source in the following statement of fact in the majority opinion: “There was a breach of Hamilton’s bond during each year of his successive terms of office. His act in taking the taxes of one year to pay arrearages of the preceding year was a breach of his official bond of the second year so that his course of conduct constituted a series of embezzlements covering the whole period that he held office.”…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Amy v. The SupervisorsSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
  2. State v. GriswoldSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1900
  3. City of Hartford v. FraneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1879
  4. Pratt's Appeal from ProbateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1874
  5. City of Waterbury v. LawlorSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1883

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

Powered by the Exa API