Legal Opinion

Harris v. Housing Authority

Connecticut Superior Court

Decided October 21, 1958No. File 23885PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtRyan, J.

The defendant demurs to the complaint as amended because the written notice given to the defendant and described in paragraph 11 of the amended complaint does not give a general description of the injuries sustained by the plaintiff in accordance with § 478d of the 1955 Cumulative Supplement. It is true, as pointed out by the plaintiff, that this statute is different from the statute requiring notice to a municipal corporation for a defective highway. A written notice is not a condition precedent to the bringing of the action but is a limitation creating a condition subsequent. Therefore, a…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Marino v. Town of East HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1935
  2. Nicholaus v. City of BridgeportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
  3. Bulkley v. Norwich & Westerly Railway Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1908
  4. Hunt v. Housing AuthorityConnecticut Superior Court · 1958

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Navarro v. RodriguezNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1984
  2. Stevenson v. EdwardsConnecticut Superior Court · 1963
  3. Fields v. Housing Authority of StamfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001
  4. Weiss v. Greenwich Housing Authority, No. Cv 93 0131151 (Apr. 7, 1994)Connecticut Superior Court · 1994

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API