Marsh v. Burhans
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Action of summary process, brought to and tried by the City Court of Hartford, Bullard, J.; facts found and judgment rendered for the plaintiff, from which the defendant appealed. In this court the appellee filed a motion to erase, upon the ground that an appeal would not lie from the judgment of the City Court, the defendant’s remedy being by writ of error.
1Opinion of the CourtHall, J.
On the 3d of April, 1906, the plaintiff brought an action of summary process against the defendant, returnable before the City Court of Hartford, in which, on April 30th, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. On the 10th of September, 1906, the judge of the City Court filed a finding of facts, and on the'19th of September the defendant’s appeal to this court, filed on that day under § 788 of the General Statutes, was allowed, upon his giving the usual appeal bond for costs.
Section 788, under the second provision of which concerning appeals the defendant claims the right of appeal to this…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Banks v. PorterSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1872
3Cited by13 opinions
- Webb v. AmblerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1939
- Mayron's Bake Shops, Inc. v. Arrow Stores, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Atlantic Refining Co. v. O'KeefeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1945
- Young v. YoungSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1999
- West Haven Housing Authority v. SimmonsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1968
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.