Seymour v. Ely
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Application for a mandamus; brought to the Superior Court in Fairfield County and tried before Minor, J. The court granted a peremptory mandamus, and the respondent moved for a new trial and also filed a motion in error. The facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion. Sundry facts were found, and points made in the argument, that become unimportant in the view of the case taken by the court.
1Opinion of the CourtPhelps, J.
The relator is one of several contractors with the selectmen of the town of Norwalk for the repair of certain specified sections of the highways of that town, and the respondent superintendent of those highways, duly elected by the inhabitants of the town as one of their annual officers under a special act of the General Assembly authorizing and providing for the election of • such an officer by that town. This act confers upon the superintendent all the power with reference to the highways of the town which the law gives to ordinary surveyors of highways, and makes those officers subordinate…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- People ex rel. Wilson v. Supervisors of AlbanyNew York Supreme Court · 1815
- Freeman v. Selectmen & Town ClerkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1867
- Goudreau v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1911
3Cited by8 opinions
- Boody v. WatsonSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1886
- State Ex Rel. Golembeske v. WhiteSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- McLeod v. ScottOregon Supreme Court · 1891
- State Ex Rel. Metropolitan Life Insurance v. UpsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1906
- Varanelli v. LuddySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1943
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.