Legal Opinion
Buxton v. Ullman
Supreme Court of Connecticut
Decided December 8, 1959PublishedCited by 55 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtBaldwin, C. J.
The complaints in these four actions seek declaratory judgments as to the constitutionality of § 53-32 of the General Statutes, prohibiting the use of any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception, and § 54-196, prohibiting the counseling or abetting of such use. 1 The plaintiff C. Bee Buxton is a licensed physician. The plaintiff Jane Doe is a married woman living with her husband. The plaintiffs Paul and Pauline Poe, as well as the plaintiffs Harold and Hanna Hoe, are husband and wife. Except for Dr. Buxton, all the plaintiffs are using, for the purpose…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Sunshine Anthracite Coal Co. v. AdkinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Pennsylvania Railroad v. International Coal Mining Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1913
- United States v. Cooper Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- Johnson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1908
- Van Beeck v. Sabine Towing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1937
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by55 opinions
- Poe v. UllmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
- State v. MarsalaSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- Doe v. RostkerDistrict Court, N.D. California · 1981
- Heiberger v. ClarkSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1961
- Doe v. MaherConnecticut Superior Court · 1986
50 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.