LYNCH v. HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION

Civ. Nos. 13737, 13738.

318 F.Supp. 1111 (1970)

Dorothy LYNCH, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. HOUSEHOLD FINANCE CORPORATION, David W. Goldman, Commissioner of the Superior Court of the State of Connecticut; Jack Friedler, Deputy Sheriff of New Haven County, individually and as representative of all Sheriffs, Deputy Sheriffs and Constables of the State of Connecticut; and Hospital of St. Raphael Employees Credit Union, Inc., Defendants. Norma TORO, on behalf of herself and all other persons similarly situated, Plaintiffs, v. Eugene A. CAMPOSANO, Jerome A. Lacobelle, Commissioner of the Superior Court of the State of Connecticut; Charles H. Barrett, Deputy Sheriff of New Haven County, individually and as representative of all Sheriffs, Deputy Sheriffs and Constables of the State of Connecticut, and The Hamden National Bank, Defendants.

United States District Court, D. Connecticut.

October 22, 1970.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Allen Sims, William H. Clendenen, Jr., David M. Lesser and Kenneth R. Kreiling, New Haven, Conn., for plaintiffs in both actions.

Richard G. Bell and Charles A. Pulaski, Jr., of Tyler, Cooper, Grant, Bowerman & Keefe, New Haven, Conn., for defendants Household Finance Corp., Goldman and Friedler in No. 13,737.

Raymond J. Cannon, Daniel R. Schaefer and C. Michael Budlong, Asst. Attys. Gen., and Robert K. Killian, Atty. Gen., State of Connecticut, Hartford, Conn., for defendant Barrett in No. 13,738.

Robert S. Evans, of Evans & Evans, New Haven, Conn., for defendant The Hamden Nat. Bank in No. 13,738.

Eugene A. Camposano, East Haven, Conn., defendant pro se in No. 13,738.

Jerome A. Lacobelle, New Haven, Conn., defendant pro se in No. 13,738.

Gerald W. Brownstein, New Haven, Conn., for The Commercial Law League of America, amicus curiae in both actions.

Before ANDERSON, Circuit Judge, and TIMBERS and ZAMPANO, District Judges.


TIMBERS, District Judge:

QUESTIONS PRESENTED

In these class actions brought by owners of a savings account and of a checking account, respectively, seeking declaratory and injunctive relief on the ground their constitutional rights are impaired by the Connecticut pre-judgment attachment and garnishment statutes, threshold questions are presented as to whether this Court has subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1983...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases