Interstate Fur Manufacturing Co. v. Redevelopment Agency
220 A.2d 162, 153 Conn. 746
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Interstate Fur Manufacturing Co. v. Redevelopment Agency. Read the opinion of the Court — 154 Conn. 600 →
Opinion
The motion by the plaintiff Harry Fogal for partial disbursement of funds on deposit with the clerk of the Superior Court in the appeal from the Superior Court in Fairfield County is denied.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Interstate Fur Manufacturing Co. v. Redevelopment Agency, 220 A.2d 162, 153 Conn. 746 (Colo. 1966).
220 A.2d 162 (Interstate Fur Manufacturing Co. v. Redevelopment Agency) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.