Legal Opinion
Pinsky v. Duncan
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided March 9, 1990No. 201, Docket No. 89-7521PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GEORGE C. PRATT, Circuit Judge:
In this appeal we consider the constitutionality of a statute that authorizes prejudgment attachment of real estate without prior notice and opportunity for a hearing, and without requiring the person obtaining *853the attachment to post a bond. Conn.Gen. Stat. § 52-278e(a)(l). Brian K. Doehr, a Connecticut landowner whose property was attached under this statute, appeals from a summary judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut, Warren W. Eginton, Judge, reported at 716 F.Supp. 58. Doehr claims that § 52-278e(a)(l) is…
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Fuentes v. ShevinSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Sniadach v. Family Finance Corp. of Bay ViewSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Connecticut v. DoehrSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
- QSP, Inc. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- McCutcheon & Burr, Inc. v. BermanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- Roland Pinsky Jennie Pinsky and Eileen Fedowitz, Brian K. Doehr v. Robert K. Duncan and Joseph Golden Insurance Agency, John F. Di GiovanniCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1996
- Double I Ltd. Partnership v. Plan & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.