Skip to main content

Sokaitis v. Bakaysa

Citations

  • 975 A.2d 51
  • 293 Conn. 17
  • 2009 Conn. LEXIS 219

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • noting that contracts for gambling activities are void, unless those activities are “expressly authorized by law” (emphasis omitted)
  • noting that contracts for gambling activities are void, unless 2 those activities are “expressly authorized by law” (emphasis 3 omitted)
  • noting that contracts for gambling activities are void, unless 2 those activities are “expressly authorized by law” (emphasis 3 omitted)
  • stating “legal wagering ... involve[s] an express or implied contract under which the consideration is ‘money ... bet’ ”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Norcott, Katz, Palmer, Zarella, Quinn

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Sokaitis v. Bakaysa

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.