Papi v. Yale

Connecticut Superior Court

Papi v. Yale

6 Conn. Super. Ct. 86, 6 Conn. Supp. 86, 1938 Conn. Super. LEXIS 56

CourtConnecticut Superior Court

DecidedApril 26, 1938

DocketFile #54490

StatusPublished

This text of 6 Conn. Super. Ct. 86 (Papi v. Yale) 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

Papi v. Yale, 6 Conn. Super. Ct. 86, 6 Conn. Supp. 86, 1938 Conn. Super. LEXIS 56 (Colo. Ct. App. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

FOSTER, J.

The real question presented by this demurrer to the complaint is the constitutionality of Special Act No. 576 of the Special Acts of 1937.

The Supreme Court of Errors of this State has discussed a somewhat similar act in Willoughby vs. New Haven, 123 Conn. 446, and has by inference recognised the possibility of an Act such as that here attacked; and in such discussion, while the question of the constitutionality of the Act was not discussed, neither is there- any suggestion that such an *87 Act is unconstitutional. So also in the case of Wladyka vs. Waterbury, 98 Conn. 305, we look in vain for any hint that such an Act may be unconstitutional.

“Whether a statute enacted pursuant to the police power is a means reasonable in quality and extent, and in time, place, and circumstance, 'presents a question to be determined by the court. ... It is the court’s duty in such case, in the exercise of great care and caution, to make every presumption and intendment in favor of the validity of the statute, and to sustain it unless its invalidity is beyond a reasonable doubt.” State vs. Heller, 123 Conn. 492, 498; 196 Atl. 337, 340.

This Court rules that the Act here in question is constitutional.

The demurrer to the complaint is overruled on all grounds therein appearing.

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

FOSTER, J.

The real question presented by this demurrer to the complaint is the constitutionality of Special Act No. 576 of the Special Acts of 1937.

The Supreme Court of Errors of this State has discussed a somewhat similar act in Willoughby vs. New Haven, 123 Conn. 446, and has by inference recognised the possibility of an Act such as that here attacked; and in such discussion, while the question of the constitutionality of the Act was not discussed, neither is there- any suggestion that such an *87 Act is unconstitutional. So also in the case of Wladyka vs. Waterbury, 98 Conn. 305, we look in vain for any hint that such an Act may be unconstitutional.

“Whether a statute enacted pursuant to the police power is a means reasonable in quality and extent, and in time, place, and circumstance, 'presents a question to be determined by the court. ... It is the court’s duty in such case, in the exercise of great care and caution, to make every presumption and intendment in favor of the validity of the statute, and to sustain it unless its invalidity is beyond a reasonable doubt.” State vs. Heller, 123 Conn. 492, 498; 196 Atl. 337, 340.

This Court rules that the Act here in question is constitutional.

The demurrer to the complaint is overruled on all grounds therein appearing.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

6 Conn. Super. Ct. 86, 6 Conn. Supp. 86, 1938 Conn. Super. LEXIS 56, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/papi-v-yale-connsuperct-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack