Legal Opinion

Sadloski v. Town of Manchester

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided December 7, 1993No. 14748PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Per curiam

The dispositive issue in this appeal is whether a trial court has subject matter jurisdiction to determine the merits of a taxpayer action without first deciding whether the taxpayer has standing to pursue such a claim. A number of taxpayers1 of the town of Manchester brought this action challenging the enforceability of a tax assessment agreement between the named defendant, the town of Manchester, and the defendant The Mall at Buckland Hills Partnership. The *81defendant Homart Manchester Investment Company is an investor in The Mall at Buckland Hills Partnership. The plaintiffs alleged that…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Castro v. VieraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  2. Alarm Applications Co. v. Simsbury Volunteer Fire Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
  3. Tomlinson v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
  4. Unisys Corp. v. Department of LaborSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
  5. Serrani v. Board of EthicsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993

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

3Cited by46 opinions

  1. Jolly, Inc. v. Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  2. Williams v. Commission On Human Rights & OpportunitiesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
  3. Sadloski v. Town of ManchesterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
  4. Gay & Lesbian Law Students Ass'n v. Board of TrusteesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  5. In Re Allison G.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2005

41 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