Legal Opinion
In Re Application of Title Guaranty Co.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 5, 1929PublishedCited by 27 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtWheeler, C. J.
The motion by the State of Connecticut and its Bank Commissioner to reopen the judgment changing the name of the defendant from The Title and Guaranty Company of Bridgeport to The Bankers Security Trust Company was based upon these allegations: The State of Connecticut and its Bank Commissioner had no notice of the pendency of the application and no opportunity to be heard thereon. Under the provisions of § 3420 of the General Statutes as amended by Chapter 154 of the Public Acts of 1919 and Chapter 235 of the Public Acts of 1921, it is provided that no corporation other than a bank or trust…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Tyler v. AspinwallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Fair v. Hartford Rubber Works Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1920
- Goldreyer v. CronanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1903
- Barber v. International Co. of MexicoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1901
- Broughel v. Southern New England Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1900
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- Marcil v. A. H. Merriman & Sons, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1932
- Cichy v. KostykSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1956
- Hoberman v. Lake of Isles, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1952
- Mazzola v. Southern New England Telephone Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1975
- Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Public Utilities Control Authority.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1978
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.