Legal Opinion

Doolittle v. Town of Preston

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided November 12, 1985No. 3585PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHull, J.

The dispositive issue in this case is whether a vote by the defendant town to “abandon” part of a road was invalid because the word “abandon” was used throughout the proceedings rather than the word “discontinue” which is used in the controlling statute, General Statutes § lSa-49.1 We conclude that the trial court was correct in concluding that the town’s use of the wrong term did not invalidate the proceedings and, therefore, we find no error.

The plaintiffs brought an action under General Statutes § 13a-103 seeking a court order to require the defendant to repair, maintain, alter and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Greist v. AmrhynSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1907
  2. City of New London v. New York, New Haven & Hartford RailroadSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1912
  3. Clark v. Town of CornwallSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1919
  4. Simmons v. Town of EastfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1861

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Hamann v. Town of NewtownConnecticut Appellate Court · 1988
  2. Benjamin v. City of NorwalkConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016
  3. Marchesi v. Bd. of Selectmen of the Town of LymeSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
  4. Savalle v. HILZINGERConnecticut Appellate Court · 2010
  5. Benjamin v. NorwalkConnecticut Appellate Court · 2016

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

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

Powered by the Exa API