Legal Opinion
Steinman v. Maier
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided February 5, 1980PublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Cubiam.
The plaintiff and the defendants owned adjoining parcels of land in the town of Middlebury, the plaintiff’s property being situated west of the defendants’ property. The plaintiff, claiming that the common boundary between the properties was lost, brought an action pursuant to General Statutes §47-34 to establish this boundary and to quiet title to the boundary as so established. Judgment was rendered for the defendants on the ground that the plaintiff’s claims were not supported by the evidence.
The disputed area consists of a rectangular piece of land located along the southerly…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Morgan v. HillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
- Fidelity & Casualty Co. v. Constitution National BankSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Toffolon v. Town of AvonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Hartford Electric Light Co. v. LevitzSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
- Velsmid v. NelsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- Waterbury Petroleum Products, Inc. v. Canaan Oil & Fuel Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
- Damora v. Christ-JanerSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Smith v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
- Robert S. Weiss & Co. v. MullinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1985
- Koennicke v. MaioranoConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.