green
Positive treatment
4.7 score
Treatment trajectory · 1999 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1999
2012
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 11 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
Buccini v. Eastern Equipment Sales, No. Cv 01 0451176 S (Aug. 8, 2002)
In Emerick , the Appellate Court ruled that "the plaintiff's allegations [to support his claim of wrongful discharge for having exercised his right to free speech during an employer sponsored forum] concern the expression of his opinions as to perceived wrongdoing on the part of upper management at United Technologies . . . a matter between him and his employer and, thus . . . not protected speech." Id., 744.
cited
Cited "see"
Spivey v. Commissioner of Correction
See State v. Spivey, 53 Conn. App. 652 , 736 A.2d 153 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 928 , 738 A.2d 653 (1999).
cited
Cited "see"
Abb Automation v. Zaharna, No. Cv01 0186734 S (Jul. 15, 2002)
See Practice Book § 10-1 ." Emerick v. Kuhn , 52 Conn. App. 724 , 749 , n. 18, 737 A.2d 456 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 929 , 738 A.2d 653 , cert. denied sub nom.
discussed
Cited "see"
Doiron v. Foote, No. 557860 (Mar. 6, 2002)
See Practice Book § 10-1 ." Emerick v. Kuhn , 52 Conn. App. 724 , 749 n. 18, 737 A.2d 456 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 929 , 738 A.2d 653 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1005 , 120 S.Ct. 500 , 145 L.Ed.2d 386 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Hendriks Associates v. Old Lyme Marina, Inc., No. 546496 (Apr. 26, 2001)
See Practice Book § 10-1 ." Emerick v. Kuhn, 52 Conn. App. 724 , 749 n. 18, 737 A.2d 456 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 929 , 738 A.2d 653 , cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1005 , 120 S.Ct. 500 , 145 L.Ed.2d 386 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
City of Hartford v. Pan Pacific Development (Connecticut), Inc.
See Auric Answering Service, Inc. v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc., 54 Conn. App. 86, 88 , 733 A.2d 307 (holding that signature of trial court on entire transcript does not satisfy requirements of Practice Book § 64-1), cert. denied, 250 Conn. 926 , 738 A.2d 653 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see"
Steiman v. Pitkoff, No. Cv00 037 36 83 (Nov. 8, 2000)
See Emerick v. Kuhn, 52 Conn. App. 724 , 744 , 737 A.2d 456 , cert. denied, 249 Conn. 929 , 738 A.2d 653 , cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 120 S.Ct. 500 , 145 L.Ed.2d 386 (1999) (stating that "[a]nalysis, rather than mere abstract assertion, is required in order to avoid abandoning an issue by failure to brief the issue properly. . . .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lund v. Milford Hospital, Inc.
Compare Alexander v. Commissioner of Administrative Ser- vices, 86 Conn. App. 677, 683 , 862 A.2d 851 (2004) (‘‘new allegations [in amended complaint] that transformed [the] previous, generic equal protec- tion claim into a colorable claim of selective enforcement . . . differ materi- ally from the equal protection allegation contained in [the] original complaint’’), Emerick v. Kuhn, 52 Conn. App. 724, 734 , 737 A.2d 456 (adding statutory and constitutional references, even if inapposite, ‘‘may be read as attempting to address the legal insufficiency specifically identified by the …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Justin LUND v. MILFORD HOSPITAL, INC.
Compare Alexander v. Commissioner of Administrative Services , 86 Conn.App. 677 , 683, 862 A.2d 851 (2004) ("new allegations [in amended complaint] that transformed [the] previous, generic equal protection claim into a colorable claim of selective enforcement ... differ materially from the equal protection allegation contained in [the] original complaint"), Emerick v. Kuhn , 52 Conn.App. 724 , 734, 737 A.2d 456 (adding statutory and constitutional references, even if inapposite, "may be read as attempting to address the legal insufficiency specifically identified by the trial court ... making …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Stechel v. Foster
Moreover, “[t]he requirements of Practice Book § 64-1 are not met by simply filing with the appellate clerk a transcript of the entire trial court proceedings.” Mikolinski v. Commissioner of Motor Vehicles, 55 Conn. App. 691, 695 , 740 A.2d 885 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 922 , 747 A.2d 518 (2000); see also Auric Answering Service, Inc. v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc., 54 Conn. App. 86, 88 , 733 A.2d 307 (holding that requirements of Practice Book § 64-1 not satisfied where trial court signed transcript of entire proceeding), cert. denied, 250 Conn. 926 , 738 A.2d 653 (1999).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Thibodeau v. Design Group One Architects, LLC
Id., 80; see also Emerick v. Kuhn, 52 Conn. App. 724, 741 , 737 A.2d 456 (“issue before us is whether the plaintiffs dismissal violated an important public policy derived from [several state statutes, a federal regulation or an executive order]” [emphasis added]), cert. denied, 249 Conn. 929 , 738 A.2d 653 , cert. denied sub nom.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
AURIC ANSWERING SERVICE, INC.
v.
GLENAYRE ELECTRONICS, INC.
v.
GLENAYRE ELECTRONICS, INC.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 9, 1999.
Alexander Scheirer, in support of the petition.
Published
The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 54 Conn. App. 86 (AC 17597), is denied.