Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit

Greater Hartford Free Bridge Ass'n v. Greater Hartford Bridge Authority

265 F.2d 656

Type: Opinion
Court: Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Jurisdiction: Federal
Date: 1959-03-31
Topic: general

PER CURIAM. Affirmed on the opinion below. 172 F. Supp. 244. In addition, we note that Section 209.210, Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations prescribes in detail the administrative remedy available to appellants.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Greater Hartford Free Bridge Ass'n v. Greater Hartford Bridge Authority. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by: 1 opinion

GREATER HARTFORD F. B. v. GREATER HARTFORD,265 F.2d 656(2nd Cir. 1959)

GREATER HARTFORD FREE BRIDGE ASSOCIATION, Benjamin H. Manheim,

Individually, doing business as Lincoln Auto Supply Co.,

Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. GREATER HARTFORD BRIDGE AUTHORITY,

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 262, Docket 25462.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Argued February 13, 1959.

Decided March 31, 1959.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut; J. Joseph Smith, Judge.

The Greater Hartford Free Bridge Association appeals from a judgment dismissing its complaint for lack of jurisdiction, for failure to exhaust its administrative remedies, and for failure to present a justiciable controversy.

Leo Parskey, Hartford, Conn. (Parskey, Gross Kline, Hartford, Conn., on the brief), for plaintiffs-appellants.

John J. Kenny, Hartford, Conn. (F. Timothy McNamara, Hartford, Conn., on the brief), for defendant-appellee.

Before MEDINA, LUMBARD and WATERMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the opinion below.172 F. Supp. 244. In addition, we note that Section 209.210, Title 33, Code of Federal Regulations prescribes in detail the administrative remedy available to appellants.Page 657