Legal Opinion
Hillcroft Partners v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided November 24, 1987No. 13158PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtShea, J.
The plaintiffs, Hillcroft Partners and Schlesinger Management Corporation, appealed to the Superior Court from an order of the defendant commission on human rights and opportunities (CHRO) implementing its finding that the policy of the plaintiff landlord and rental agent in limiting occupancy of their three-bedroom apartments to no more than four persons discriminated against prospective tenants with minor children in violation of General Statutes § 46a-64a.1 The trial court dismissed the appeal because of the failure to serve the complainant, Margaret Schifini, who had instituted the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Foote v. BartholomewSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1925
- Royce v. Freedom of Information CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Basilicato v. Department of Public Utility ControlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- State v. EricksonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- State Ex Rel. Eastern Color Printing Co. v. JenksSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1963
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Lauer v. Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Tolly v. Department of Human ResourcesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
- Miko v. Commission on Human Rights & OpportunitiesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Tarnopol v. Connecticut Siting CouncilSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Fong v. Planning & Zoning Board of AppealsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.