Legal Opinion

Friedlander v. Friedlander

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided August 9, 1983No. 10785), (10870), (11456PublishedCited by 37 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtParskey, J.

This case presents three appeals by the defendant that were consolidated for the purposes of oral argument. In appeal No. 10785, the defendant appeals a contempt order and a $1000 fine, the award to the plaintiff of counsel fees in connection with the contempt, the granting of a $3000 allowance to the plaintiff to defend this appeal, and the denial of the defendant’s motion to reargue, modify, and order. In appeal No. 10870, the defendant appeals the denial of his motion for order, the award to the plaintiff of counsel fees for defense of that motion, and the granting of a $3500 allowance to…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Bartha v. Waterbury House Wrecking Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
  2. Tobey v. TobeySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1974
  3. Krasnow v. KrasnowSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1953
  4. Steinmann v. SteinmannSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936
  5. State v. JacksonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1960

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

3Cited by37 opinions

  1. Cummings v. TrippSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  2. Eldridge v. EldridgeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  3. Connecticut National Bank v. RytmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  4. Beaudoin v. Town Oil Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  5. State v. BurgeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985

32 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