Legal Opinion
Murphy v. Bergin
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided March 7, 1934PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMaltbie, C. J.
The Liquor Control Act, General Statutes, Cum. Sup. 1933, § 669b et seq., had its origin in three Public Acts of the General Assembly of 1933, Chapters 140, 329 and 330. The latter two were amendments of the first Act. Chapter 330 contained a number of detailed changes not material to the question before us. Chapter 329, however, dealt solely with the rights of druggists and druggist permits and is directly involved in this controversy. The original file of the bill, and the journals of the House and Senate, show that the bill was received in the Senate on the last day of the session, under…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Silver v. SilverSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
- State v. CullumSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1929
- Moynihan's Appeal From County CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1903
- Malmo's Appeal From County CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1899
- Hopson's Appeal from County CommissionersSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1894
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Murphy, Inc. v. Town of WestportSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1944
- State v. FaroSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1934
- Loglisci v. Liquor Control CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1937
- State Ex Rel. Haverback v. ThomsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1948
- Connecticut Television, Inc. v. Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1970
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.