Legal Opinion

Fraser v. City of Norwich

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided June 27, 1950PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtInglis, J.

The assignments of error on this appeal question only the conclusions of the trial court. The gist of those conclusions is that the plaintiff is not entitled to recover the amounts by which his pay as a police officer was reduced by resolution of the common council of the city of Norwich in order to appropriate those amounts to the city’s police benefit reserve fund.

In April, 1903, pursuant to the statutes then in effect, General Statutes, Rev. 1902, c. 124, the city of Norwich established a police reserve fund to provide money from which retired police officers could receive retirement pay.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Pennie v. ReisSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
  2. State ex rel. Risch v. Board of Trustees of the Policemen's Pension FundWisconsin Supreme Court · 1904
  3. Hughes v. TraegerIllinois Supreme Court · 1914
  4. Rule v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1936

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Karen Pineman v. William G. OechslinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1981
  2. Reagan v. Board of Firemen, Policemen & Fire Alarm Operators' Pension Fund TrusteesCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1957

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

Powered by the Exa API