Legal Opinion
Nania v. Borges
Connecticut Superior Court
Decided June 9, 1988No. File No. CV 88, 0430983SPublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtSpada, J.
This is an action for a writ of mandamus. The complaint raises two issues: (1) whether the plaintiffs have standing to prosecute this claim, and (2) whether the state treasurer is subject to a mandamus writ under General Statutes § 4-30a.
A hearing was held on May 25, 1988, at which time the parties agreed, with the court’s approval, to try the plaintiffs’ motions for a temporary and permanent mandamus in a consolidated fashion. At this hearing both sides presented argument on the defendants’ motion to dismiss, which was based on lack of standing and mootness. In their request for a writ of…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Flast v. CohenSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- Duke Power Co. v. Carolina Environmental Study Group, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Schlesinger v. Reservists Committee to Stop the WarSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Coleman v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Alarm Applications Co. v. Simsbury Volunteer Fire Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1980
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Alons v. Iowa District Court for Woodbury CountySupreme Court of Iowa · 2005
- Catone v. BelitskyConnecticut Superior Court · 2003
- Enama v. Weicker, No. Cv94-0046563s (Jun. 13, 1994)Connecticut Superior Court · 1994
- Griffiths v. Hartford Hospital, No. Cv 96-0384991s (Oct. 16, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998