United Liquors of Connecticut, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 443

Supreme Court of Connecticut

United Liquors of Connecticut, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 443

425 A.2d 1262, 179 Conn. 211, 1979 Conn. LEXIS 936

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedOctober 30, 1979

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 425 A.2d 1262 (United Liquors of Connecticut, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 443) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

United Liquors of Connecticut, Inc. v. Teamsters Local 443, 425 A.2d 1262, 179 Conn. 211, 1979 Conn. LEXIS 936 (Colo. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The original defendants having withdrawn their appeal to this court and the judgment of the trial court, therefore, having become conclusive as to the original parties, any actual controversy which may have existed vis-a-vis them and the intervening defendant, the state board of mediation and arbitration, necessarily became moot.

In Harkins v. Driscoll, 165 Conn. 407, 409, 334 A.2d 901, we stated, quoting Reynolds v. Vroom, 130 Conn. 512, 515, 36 A.2d 22, that “[i]t is a well-settled general rule that the existence of an actual controversy is an essential requisite to appellate jurisdiction; it is not the province of appellate courts to decide moot questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief or from the determination of which no practical relief can follow.”

The appeal of the intervening defendant is dismissed as moot.

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

Per Curiam.

The original defendants having withdrawn their appeal to this court and the judgment of the trial court, therefore, having become conclusive as to the original parties, any actual controversy which may have existed vis-a-vis them and the intervening defendant, the state board of mediation and arbitration, necessarily became moot.

In Harkins v. Driscoll, 165 Conn. 407, 409, 334 A.2d 901, we stated, quoting Reynolds v. Vroom, 130 Conn. 512, 515, 36 A.2d 22, that “[i]t is a well-settled general rule that the existence of an actual controversy is an essential requisite to appellate jurisdiction; it is not the province of appellate courts to decide moot questions, disconnected from the granting of actual relief or from the determination of which no practical relief can follow.”

The appeal of the intervening defendant is dismissed as moot.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

425 A.2d 1262, 179 Conn. 211, 1979 Conn. LEXIS 936, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-liquors-of-connecticut-inc-v-teamsters-local-443-conn-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack