Legal Opinion
Liebeskind v. City of Waterbury
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 23, 1955PublishedCited by 28 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtO’Sullivan, J.
For the purposes of this reservation the parties have stipulated as follows: The plaintiffs are residents and taxpayers of the defendant city and operate stores in its central mercantile area. The defendant presently is, and for some time past has been, acting under powers conferred by Special Act No. 346, passed in 1947. 25 Spec. Laws 545. By virtue of that enactment, the city was authorized to plan, establish and maintain off-street parking facilities and to finance such projects in certain designated ways. In 1949 and again in 1953, the General Assembly authorized the city to issue parking…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Aetna Life Insurance v. HaworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Tracy v. GinzbergSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Board of Education of Stamford v. Board of FinanceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1940
- Samson v. BerginSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
- McGee v. DunniganSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1951
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by28 opinions
- United Oil Co. v. Urban Redevelopment CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1969
- Connecticut Foundry Co. v. International Ladies Garment Workers UnionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- McAnerney v. McAnerneySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1973
- Milford Power Co v. Alstom Power, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- State Ex Rel. Kelman v. SchafferSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1971
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.