McGuirl v. City of New Haven

Connecticut Superior Court

McGuirl v. City of New Haven

7 Conn. Super. Ct. 104, 7 Conn. Supp. 104, 1939 Conn. Super. LEXIS 40

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedMarch 15, 1939

DocketFile 54703

StatusPublished

This text of 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 104 (McGuirl v. City of New Haven) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Superior Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McGuirl v. City of New Haven, 7 Conn. Super. Ct. 104, 7 Conn. Supp. 104, 1939 Conn. Super. LEXIS 40 (Colo. Ct. App. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

BOOTH, J.

The defendants’ motion to dismiss or erase-raises one question, to wit: whether the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation is liable in a suit setting up such a cause of action-as is pleaded in the complaint. It is the claim that because this-action sounds in tort Congress has not given its consent to such suits against the defendant, the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation.

The court’s attention has been called to cases throughout the-country in various district courts and state courts. The opin' ions have been in direct conflict on this question, the greater *105 number, perhaps, agreeing with the defendants’ contention, whereas the better reasoned opinions, in this court’s judgment, are in the minority. This conflict, however, has recently been, settled by the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Keifer & Keifer vs. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 83 L. ed. 512, decided February 27, 1939. It is therein held that the conventional “to-sue-and-be-sued” clause found in the act of incorporation of the defendant permits suits whether sounding in tort or contract.

This being so, the motion of the defendant is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BOOTH, J.

The defendants’ motion to dismiss or erase-raises one question, to wit: whether the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation is liable in a suit setting up such a cause of action-as is pleaded in the complaint. It is the claim that because this-action sounds in tort Congress has not given its consent to such suits against the defendant, the Home Owners’ Loan Corporation.

The court’s attention has been called to cases throughout the-country in various district courts and state courts. The opin' ions have been in direct conflict on this question, the greater *105 number, perhaps, agreeing with the defendants’ contention, whereas the better reasoned opinions, in this court’s judgment, are in the minority. This conflict, however, has recently been, settled by the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Keifer & Keifer vs. Reconstruction Finance Corp., 83 L. ed. 512, decided February 27, 1939. It is therein held that the conventional “to-sue-and-be-sued” clause found in the act of incorporation of the defendant permits suits whether sounding in tort or contract.

This being so, the motion of the defendant is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

7 Conn. Super. Ct. 104, 7 Conn. Supp. 104, 1939 Conn. Super. LEXIS 40, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcguirl-v-city-of-new-haven-connsuperct-1939.