Legal Opinion

Salgado v. Commissioner of Transportation

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided March 25, 2008No. AC 28142PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

HARPER, J.

In this defective highway action, the defendants, two former commissioners of transportation, appeal from the judgment of the trial court denying their motion to dismiss the property damage and indemnification claims of the plaintiff Arrow Trucking Company, Inc. The defendants maintain that, given the notice requirements of the state defective highway statute, General Statutes § 13a-144, 2 the court improperly concluded that the plaintiff had provided adequate notice of its claims. The defendants also maintain that, because the plaintiff failed to provide notice under this…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Sanzone v. Board of Police CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
  2. White v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  3. Baker v. IvesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1972
  4. Lussier v. Department of TransportationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  5. Bresnan v. FrankelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. C. R. Klewin Northeast, LLC v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
  2. Stotler v. Department of TransportationConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
  3. Santiago v. Commissioner of Motor VehiclesConnecticut Appellate Court · 2012
  4. Mills v. Commissioner of TransportationConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
  5. Boykin v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API