Legal Opinion
Blitz v. Subklew
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided December 17, 2002No. AC 22332PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HENNESSY, J.
The plaintiff, Richard Blitz, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the defendant, Arthur Subklew, after a trial to the court. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) found that the zoning board of appeals of the town of Goshen (board) would not grant the defendant’s application for a used car sales license and that the defendant therefore was not liable under a lease in which a condition precedent was the approval of such an application, and (2) awarded the defendant the return of his security deposit.
The following facts…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Lach v. CahillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Christophersen v. BlountSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Maloney v. PCRE, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Putnam Park Associates v. Fahnestock & Co.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- F & W Welding Service, Inc. v. ADL Contracting Corp.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- German v. FordCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2009
- Allen v. JohnsonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Gianetti v. Health Net of Connecticut, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2009
- State v. MarchSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Stonington Water Street Assoc., LLC v. Hodess Building Co.District Court, D. Connecticut · 2011
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.