Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Hartnett v. Zeller
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 22, 1949PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJennings, J.
In this action of mandamus, the relator, hereinafter called the plaintiff, sought a judgment requiring the defendant to issue an order on the state treasurer for $1840, which, the plaintiff claimed, was due him as unpaid salary for the period between June 15, 1947, and November 26, 1947. The basic question is: Was the plaintiff in the employ of the state during that time?
The assignments of error include numerous attacks on the finding. Such sweeping attacks are permissible under the rules and are occasionally not only proper but necessary. See Kiessling v. Kiessling, 134 Conn. 564, 59 A. 2d…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hazzard v. GallucciSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
- Kiessling v. KiesslingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- State Ex Rel. McNamara v. Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1942
- State Ex Rel. Buckman v. MunsonOhio Supreme Court · 1943
- Staff v. HawkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1949
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- McAdams v. BarbieriSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
- Mad River Co. v. Town of WolcottSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- Hannifan v. SachsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1962
- Perretta v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Strang v. WitkowskiSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.