green
Positive treatment
3.5 score
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Brody v. Brody
See Brown v. Villano, 49 Conn. App. 365 , 369–70, 716 A.2d 111 (new hearing required where trial court improperly applied preponderance standard, rather than clear and convincing standard), cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904 , 720 A.2d 513 (1998).
cited
Cited "see"
In re Jessica S.
See Brown v. Villano, 49 Conn. App. 365, 372 , 716 A.2d 111 , cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904 , 720 A.2d 513 (1998).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lesnewski v. Redvers
General Statutes §§ 45a-242 (a) and 45a-199; see also Brown v. Villano, 49 Conn. App. 365, 373-74 , 716 A.2d 111 (remanding to Superior Court to apply Newman’s best *541 interests test to determine whether conserved person’s attorney may appeal Probate Court’s acceptance of accounting of conserved person’s estate), cert. denied, 247 Conn. 904 , 720 A.2d 513 (1998).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
VINCENT J. DOWLING, SR.
v.
FINLEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
v.
FINLEY ASSOCIATES, INC.
SC 15998.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 15, 1998.
Richard P. Weinstein and Nathan A. Schatz, in support of the petition., R. Bartley Halloran, in opposition.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 49 Conn. App. 330 (AC 16843/ 16844), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that, with respect to the plaintiffs’ 1995 indemnification action, the prior general verdict barred the action because of the doctrine of collateral estoppel?”
PALMER, J., did not participate in the consideration or decision of this petition.