green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 5×
19.3 score
G Cite
cited 11× by 6 distinct cases ·
"Horton I"
Treatment trajectory · 1977 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1977
2001
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding, Inc. v. Rell
(7×)
also: Cited "see", Cited "see, e.g."
he judicial department properly stays its hand to give the legislative department an opportunity to act
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Green Party of Connecticut v. Garfield
ecisions of the united states supreme court defining fundamental rights are persuasive authority to be afforded respectful consideration, but they are to be followed by connecticut courts only when they provide no less individual protection than is guaranteed by connecticut law.
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Contractor's Supply of Waterbury, LLC v. Commissioner of Environmental Protection
his court has many times noted that the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions have a like meaning and impose similar constitutional limitations
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Long
his court has many times noted that the equal protection clauses of the state and federal constitutions have a like meaning and impose similar constitutional limitations
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Broadly v. Meriden Board of Education, No. 27 35 07 (Aug. 18, 1992)
horton i
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
William Penn S.D. v. PA Dept. of Ed.
Law Professor Amici cite numerous cases from other jurisdictions, in which courts have concluded education is a fundamental right under their respective constitutions, such as: Serrano v. Priest, 557 P.2d 929, 951-52 (Cal. 1976) (Serrano II), reaffirming Serrano I, 487 P.2d at 1255-59 ; Horton v. Meskill, 376 A.2d 359, 372-75 (Conn. 1977); Rose, 790 S.W.2d at 205 ; Claremont School District, 703 A.2d at 1358-59 ; Leandro, 488 S.E.2d at 255 ; Campbell County School District, 907 P.2d at 1257 ; Bismarck Public School District No. 1 v. State By & Through North Dakota Legislative Assembly, 511 N.W…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
William Penn School District v. Pennsylvania Department of Education
Furthermore, the mixed signals we may glean from our decisional law echo the conflicting array of rulings in other state courts confronting the same question.69 We should not treat as settled a question that we have never answered conclusively.70 (…continued) and arguing in favor of analyzing legislative compliance with a given mandate as a question of fiduciary duty, “using the tools of deference appropriate to the review of discretionary decisions by individuals in positions of trust”). 69 See Serrano v. Priest, 557 P.2d 929, 951-52 (Ca. 1976) (“fundamental interest” in education u…
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Rozanne E. King Alisha Jane King Dacie S. Houston, Individually and as Mother and Next Friend of Skylar Dwayne Ostrander, Chay Cortez Ostrander, and Adlia William Cortez Flood III Brandy R. Drake, Individually and as Mother and Next Friend of Logan Genner Luhmann, Susan Maule, Stephanie Maule, and Jacob Maule Michael Campbell, Individually and as Father and Next Friend of George Campbell and Soph
(5×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
No. 30, 651 S.W.2d 90, 91 (Ark. 1983); Lujan v. Colo. State Bd. of Educ., 649 P.2d 1005 , 1010–11 (Colo. 1982); Horton v. Meskill, 376 A.2d 359, 361 (Conn. 1977); McDaniel v. Thomas, 285 S.E.2d 156, 157 (Ga. 1981); Thompson v. Engelking, 537 P.2d 635, 636 (Idaho 1975); Comm. for Educ.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Paynter v. State of NY
Appendix to Dissenting Opinion See Serrano v Priest, 18 Cal 3d 728, 766, 557 P2d 929, 951 (1976) (“education is a fundamental interest”); Horton v Meskill, 172 Conn 615, 648-649, 376 A2d 359, 374 (1977) (“without doubt the trial court correctly held that, in Connecti *471 cut, elementary and secondary education is a fundamental right, that pupils in the public schools are entitled to the equal enjoyment of that right, and that the state system of financing public elementary and secondary education as it presently exists and operates cannot pass the test of ‘strict judicial scrutiny’ …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Pellegrino v. Rhode Island Ethics Commission
(2×)
The principle of sovereign immunity, although deeply rooted in the common law, must give way to constitutional provisions like the just-compensation clause because "the source of governmental power and authority is not vested by divine right in a ruler but rests in the people themselves who have adopted constitutions creating governments with defined and limited powers and courts to interpret these basic laws." Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 363 (Conn.1977).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Richards v. League of United Latin American Citizens
No. 1 v. Herschler, 606 P.2d 310, 334 (Wyo.1980); Crawford v. Bd. of Education, 17 Cal.3d 280, 295 , 130 Cal.Rptr. 724, 734-35 , 551 P.2d 28, 38-39 (1976); Serrano v. Priest, 5 Cal.3d 584 , 96 Cal.Rptr. 601 , 487 P.2d 1241, 1254-55 (1971); Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 374-75 (1977).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Skeen v. State
(2×)
For other cases holding that education is a fundamental right, see Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 373 (1977); Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W.Va. 672 , 255 S.E.2d 859, 878 (1979); Rose v. Council for Better Education, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186, 206 (Ky.1989); Serrano v. Priest, 18 Cal.3d 728 , 135 Cal.Rptr. 345, 367 , 557 P.2d 929, 951 (1976), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 907 , 97 S.Ct. 2951 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1079 (1977). .
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
Opinion of the Justices
(3×)
also: Cited "see"
Number One v. Herschler, 606 P.2d 310, 333 (Wyo.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 824 [ 101 S.Ct. 86 , 66 L.Ed.2d 28 ] (1980) ("In the light of the emphasis which the Wyoming Constitution places on education, there is no room for any conclusion but that education for the children of Wyoming is a matter of fundamental interest."; Pauley, 255 S.E.2d at 878 ("the mandatory requirement of `a thorough and efficient system of free schools' ... demonstrates that education is a fundamental constitutional right in this state.") Other courts have looked, in addition, beyond the four corners of their constitutio…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Tennessee Small School Systems v. McWherter
No. 1 v. Herschler, 606 P.2d at 332 , the Wyoming Supreme Court found that “in the light of the emphasis which the Wyoming constitution places on education, there is no room for any conclusion but that education for the children of Wyoming is a matter of fundamental interest.” In Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 373 (1977), the Connecticut Supreme Court stated that “in the light of the Connecticut constitutional recognition of the right to education ... it is, in Connecticut, a fundamental right.” The United States Supreme Court addressed the value of education in Brown…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Davenport v. Garcia
(2×)
Co. v. Arizona Corp. Comm’n, 160 Ariz. 350 , 773 P.2d 455, 460 (1989) (following the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ approach in McCormick and Foster in striking down prior restraints against newspapers under their own state constitution); Coleman v. Utah State Land Bd., 795 P.2d 622 , 632 n. 2 (Utah 1990) (looking to other states’ constitutions to help determine whether the Utah Constitution’s provisions are self-executing); Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 373 (1977) (examining the law of other states rather than the Supreme Court’s opinion in San Antonio Indep.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Carrollton-Farmers Branch Independent School District v. Edgewood Independent School District
(2×)
E.g., Serrano v. Priest, 18 Cal.3d 728 , 135 Cal.Rptr. 345 , 557 P.2d 929, 940, 958 (1976) (trial court judgment setting a period of six years from the date of entry of judgment as a reasonable time for bringing the system into constitutional compliance affirmed); Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 376 (1977) (stayed judicial intervention to afford the General Assembly an opportunity to take appropriate legislative action); Rose v. Council for Better Educ, Inc., 790 S.W.2d 186, 216 (Ky.1989) (withheld finality of the judgment issued June 8, 1989 until 90 days after the adjournmen…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
DuPree v. Alma School District No. 30
“It is the very essence and foundation of a civilized culture; it is the cohesive element that binds the fabric of our society together.” Horton at 377, Bogdanski, J. cone.
cited
Cited "see"
Graham v. Friedlander
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 623 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mueller v. Tepler
See Sheff v. O’Neill, 238 Conn. 1 , 45–46, 678 A.2d 1267 (1996) (‘‘In light of the complexities of developing a legislative program that would respond to the constitutional deprivation that the plain- tiffs had established, we concluded, in [Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 653 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977)], that further judicial intervention should be stayed to afford the General Assembly an opportunity to take appropriate legislative action. . . .
discussed
Cited "see"
Batte-Holmgren v. Commissioner of Public Health
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Whitaker v. Commissioner of Correction
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
A. Aiudi & Sons, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Commission
(2×)
See Clarke v. Commissioner of Correction, 249 Conn. 350, 358 , 732 A.2d 754 (1999), citing State v. Doscher, 172 Conn. 592 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Lillbask Ex Rel. Mauclaire v. Sergi
See Horton, 172 Conn, at 642, 376 A.2d 359 . “[Federal decisional law is not a lid on the protections guaranteed under [the] state constitution.” Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu P’ship v. Bailey, 229 Conn. 312, 316 , 640 A.2d 101 (1994) (alternation in original) (quoting Doe v. Maher, 40 Conn.Supp. 394, 419 , 515 A.2d 134 (Super.Ct.1986)).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mikolitch v. State, No. 542792 (Mar. 2, 1998)
There are three exceptions to the settled doctrine that the state is immune from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity: (1) an action where there is a statutory waiver of sovereign immunity and legislative consent to suit; see Lacasse v. Burns, supra, 214 Conn. 468 ; (2) an action based on a substantial claim that the state has violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff; see Horton v. Meskill , 172 Conn., 615 , 623-25 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); and (3) an action based on a substantial claim that a state official has violated the plaintiff's rights by acting in excess of his statutory…
cited
Cited "see"
Packer v. Thomaston Board of Education, No. Cv 97 0075242 (Jan. 9, 1998)
See Horton v. Meskill , 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); Sheff v. O'Neill , CT Page 1194 238 Conn. 1 , 678 A.2d 1267 (1996).
discussed
Cited "see"
Collins v. Varney, No. Lpl-Cv-95-0533063s (Nov. 10, 1997)
There are three exceptions to the settled doctrine that the state is immune from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity: (1) an action where there is a statutory waiver of sovereign immunity and legislative consent to suit; see Lacasse v. Burns, 214 Conn. 464 , 468 , 572 A.2d 357 (1990); (2) an action based on a substantial claim that the state has violated a constitutional right of the plaintiff; see Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 623-25 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); and (3) an action based on a substantial claim that a state official has violated the plaintiff's rights by acting in exces…
discussed
Cited "see"
Leandro v. State
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 652 , 376 A.2d 359, 375 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Committee for Educational Rights v. Edgar
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 650 , 376 A.2d 359, 375 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Committee for Educational Rights v. Edgar
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 650, 376 A.2d 359, 375 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Battle
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639-53 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Golden Hill Paugussett Tribe v. State, No. Cv 93 0530878 (Nov. 2, 1994)
See Horton v. Meskill , 172 Conn. 615 , 624 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bismarck Public School District 1 v. State Ex Rel. North Dakota Legislative Assembly
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W.Va. 672 , 255 S.E.2d 859 (1979); Serrano v. Priest, 18 Cal.3d 728 , 135 Cal.Rptr. 345 , 557 P.2d 929 (1976), cert. denied, 432 U.S. 907 , 97 S.Ct. 2951 , 53 L.Ed.2d 1079 (1977); Washakie Co. School Dist.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Linares
See State v. Miller, 29 Conn. App. 207, 222 , 614 A.2d 1229 (1992) (decisions of the United States Supreme Court defining fundamental rights are persuasive authority to be afforded respectful consideration, but they are to be followed by Connecticut courts only when they provide no less individual protection than is guaranteed by Connecticut law), quoting Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 641-42 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Daly v. DelPonte
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 641-45 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Kinney v. Connecticut Judicial Dept., No. Cv91-395815 (Dec. 22, 1992)
Krozser v. New Haven, 212 Conn. 415 , 420 , 562 A.2d 1080 (1989), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 1036 (1990); see Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 623 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Daly v. DelPonte
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639-53 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); compare Dydyn v. Department of Liquor Control, 12 Conn. App. 455, 464 , 531 A.2d 170 , cert. denied, 205 Conn. 812 , 532 A.2d 586 (1987), cert. denied, 485 U.S. 977 , 108 S. Ct. 1272 , 99 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Kirby v. Edgewood Independent School District
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359, 375-6 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see"
Sentner v. Board of Trustees of Regional Community Colleges
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 624 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977); Simmons v. Parizek, 158 Conn. 304, 307 , 259 A.2d 642 (1969); see also Larson v. Domestic & Foreign Commerce Corporation, 337 U.S. 682, 690, 691 , 69 S. Ct. 1457 , 93 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Plasticrete Corp. v. American Policyholders Insurance
It is read so as to be consistent and implications seemingly inconsistent with the main facts are to be brought into harmony with them.” Maltbie, Conn. App. Proc. § 135; see Horton v. Meshill, 172 Conn. 615, 639 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
examined
Cited "see"
Mary Gormley v. Director, Connecticut State Department of Probation and Attorney General of the State of Connecticut
(4×)
Accord, State v. Doscher, 172 Conn. 592 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977)
discussed
Cited "see"
Seattle School District No. 1 v. State
(2×)
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
cited
Cited "see"
Galullo v. City of Waterbury
See Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 636-37 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Davis v. Ssd Dept. of Ed.
(2×)
See, e.g., Horton v. Meskill, 376 A.2d 359, 373 (Conn. 1977); Pauley v. Kelly, 255 S.E.2d 859, 878 (W.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Columbia Air Services, Inc. v. Department of Transportation
Id., 322 ; see also Horton v. Meskill, [ 172 Conn. 615, 624 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977)] (the government cannot justifiably claim interference with its func *351 tions when the acts complained of are unconstitutional or unauthorized by statute . . .).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
M.H. Ex Rel. H. v. Bristol Board of Education
However, when a plaintiff "makes no claim ... that any of the defendant officers sued in their individual capaci-lies acted pursuant to an unconstitutional enactment or in excess of statutory authority[,] ... sovereign immunity requires dismissal [of those portions of the complaint seeking damages.]” Fetterman v. Univ. of Connecticut, 192 Conn. 539, 552-53 , 473 A.2d 1176 (1984); see also Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 624 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977)(concluding that, in Connecticut, the doctrine of sovereign immunity does not apply to a defendant who is acting under an unconstitutional statute …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Schiavone v. Destefano
Where the legislation impinges upon a fundamental right ... it must be struck down unless justified by a compelling state interest.’ Id., 342 ; see also Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639-40 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).” Bruno v. Civil Service Commission, supra, 345.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Schiavone v. Destefano
Where the legislation impinges upon a fundamental right . . . it must be struck down unless justified by a compelling state interest.' Id., 342 ; see also Horton v. Meskill , 172 Conn. 615 , 639-40 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977)." Bruno v. Civil Service Commission , supra, 345.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re State Police Litigation
See, e.g., Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 641-42 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977) (“In the area of fundamental civil liberties ... we sit as a court of last resort, subject only to the qualification that our interpretations may not restrict the guarantees accorded the national citizenry under the federal charter.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Doe v. Maher
See, e.g., Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639-51 [ 376 A.2d 359 ] (1977) (holding that Connecticut’s school financing system violated Connecticut, though not federal, constitution); Roundhouse Construction [Corporation] v. Telesco Masons Supply Co., Inc., 170 Conn. 155, 157-59 , [ 365 A.2d 393 ,] cert. denied, 429 U.S. 889 [ 97 S. Ct. 246 , 50 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Bruno v. Civil Service Commission
Where the legislation impinges upon a fundamental right ... it must be struck down unless justified by a compelling state interest.” Id., 342 ; see also Horton v. Meskill, 172 Conn. 615, 639-40 , 376 A.2d 359 (1977).
State of Connecticut
v.
Jay A. Doscher
v.
Jay A. Doscher
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 29, 1977.
Guy W. Wolf III, assistant prosecuting attorney, in support of the petition., Frank Cochran, in opposition.
House, Cotter, Loiselle, Bogdanski, Longo, Barber.
Cited by 10 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Connecticut (3) · Connecticut Superior Court (1) · D. Connecticut (1)
Per Curiam.
The petition for certification is denied, it not appearing that “there are special and important reasons” to grant certification. Practice Book § 742. We repeat what we said in State v. Chisholm, 155 Conn. 706, 707, 236 A.2d 465: “[A] denial of certification does not necessarily indicate our approval either of the result reached by the Appellate Division or of the opinion rendered by it.”