1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. A.2d
  4. 974 A.2d
  5. 974 A.2d 68 (2009)
 

MURPHY v. CITY OF STAMFORD

No. 30168.

974 A.2d 68 (2009)

115 Conn.App. 675

Karen A. MURPHY v. CITY OF STAMFORD et al.

Appellate Court of Connecticut.

Decided July 14, 2009.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Karen A. Murphy, pro se, the appellant (plaintiff).

Kenneth B. Povodator, assistant corporation counsel, with whom, on the brief, was Thomas M. Cassone, corporation counsel, for the appellee (named defendant).

Robert G. Rafferty filed a brief for the appellee (defendant DeRosa Tennis Contractors, Inc.).

BISHOP, LAVINE and BORDEN, Js.

PER CURIAM.

The pro se plaintiff, Karen A. Murphy, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing her action against the defendants, the city of Stamford (city) and DeRosa Tennis Contractors, Inc. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that she lacked standing to challenge the city on the ground that it had exceeded its spending and bonding authority under the city charter when it made payments under a $5.7 million contract for...

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