Fonsworth v. Sudol, 565 A.2d 539 (Conn. 1989). · Go Syfert
Search
Fonsworth v. Sudol, 565 A.2d 539 (Conn. 1989). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“the trial court's reversal of the foic decision, as based on an unsound proposition of law,' was authorized by 4-183 () (4). accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not exceed the scope of its judicial review.”
32 citation events (11 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: West Hartford B.O.E. v. State of B.O.E., No. Cv 01 0510157s (Jun. 19, 2002) (connsuperct, 2002-06-19)
Treatment trajectory · 1990 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1990 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 4 distinct citers.
examined Cited as authority (quoted) West Hartford B.O.E. v. State of B.O.E., No. Cv 01 0510157s (Jun. 19, 2002)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2002 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
the trial court's reversal of the foic decision, as based on an unsound proposition of law,' was authorized by 4-183 () (4). accordingly, we conclude that the trial court did not exceed the scope of its judicial review.
discussed Cited "see" Tompkins v. Freedom of Information Commission
Conn. App. Ct. · 2012 · signal: see · confidence high
See Board of Pardons v. Freedom of Information Commission, 19 Conn. App. 539, 546 , 563 A.2d 314 , cert. denied, 212 Conn. 819 , 565 A.2d 539 (1989); see also General Statutes § 4-166 et seq. “[W]here aparty appeals pursuant to the jurisdictional grant of the UAPA, the agency action is measured by the standards contained within the UAPA. . . .
discussed Cited "see" State v. Dixon (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
Indeed, that is precisely why the rules of practice contemplate that the report accompany the defendant into the correctional system; see Board of Pardons v. Freedom of Information Commission, 19 Conn. App. 539, 543 , 563 A.2d 314 (board of pardons considers report, along with all other information, in determining whether to issue pardon), cert. denied, 212 Conn. 819 , 565 A.2d 539 (1989); and specifically why the court in this case declined to amend the report.
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Salce v. Wolczek
Conn. · 2014 · signal: see, e.g. · confidence low
See, e.g., Chomko v. Patmon, 19 Conn. App. 483 , 484 n.1, 563 A.2d 311 (‘‘[a] [b]ond for [d]eed . . . is an installment sale contract of real property where the buyer takes possession of the property but does not receive fee simple title of the property until a later date’’ [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 212 Conn. 819 , 565 A.2d 539 (1989).
Frank E. Fonsworth, Jr.
v.
Steven B. Sudol
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 12, 1989.
565 A.2d 539
Susan K. Smith, in support of the petition., Grant H. Miller, Jr., in opposition.
Published
1 passage pin-cited by 1 case
Pinpoint authority: bottom 62%
Citer courts: Connecticut Superior Court (1)

The plaintiffs’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 19 Conn. App. 368, is denied.