Legal Opinion
Filisko v. Bridgeport Hydraulic Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided August 29, 1978PublishedCited by 68 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtLoftgo, J.
The plaintiffs, George and Elizabeth Filisko, brought suit in three counts claiming damages for injury allegedly caused to their property by polluted water running from the defendant town of Easton’s refuse dump, across the defendant Bridgeport Hydraulic Company’s property, and onto the plaintiffs’ land. The first count of their complaint may be characterized as common-law nuisance; the second as a private right of action under General Statutes § 25-26, pertaining to the authority of the commissioner of environmental protection to regulate discharges of waste into the waters of this state;…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Ziman v. WhitleySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Camp v. BoothSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
- Kostyal v. CassSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
- Nailor v. C. W. Blakeslee & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1933
- Chazen v. City of New BritainSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by68 opinions
- Orr v. CrowderWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1984
- Maloney v. PacSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Doe v. ManheimerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1989
- Pestey v. CushmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
- State v. Tippetts-Abbett-McCarthy-StrattonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
63 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.