green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
5.8 score
G Cite
Treatment trajectory · 1996 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1996
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Croom v. Duchess Hamburger of Stratford, No. Cv94 031 06 86 (Mar. 7, 1998)
there is no authority for the proposition that a defendant's status as the owner of commercial property imposes a different, and higher, duty of care than that imposed on owners of private or ct page 3019 residential property
discussed
Cited "see"
Belevich v. Renaissance I, LLC.
See Sinert v. Olympia & York Development Co., 38 Conn. App. 844 , 848–50, 664 A.2d 791 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 927 , 667 A.2d 553 (1995). 8 Cf. Solazzo v. New York City Transit Authority, 6 N.Y.3d 734, 735 , 843 N.E.2d 748 , 810 N.Y.S.2d 121 (2005) (applying New York law) (‘‘A property owner will not be held liable in negligence for a plaintiff’s injuries sustained as the result of an icy condition occurring during an ongoing storm or for a reasonable time thereafter . . . .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Crump
See State v. Hanks, 39 Conn. 333, 343 , 665 A.2d 102 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 926 , 666 A.2d 1187 (1995); see also State v. Elijah, 42 Conn. App. 687, 696-97 , 684 A.2d 709 (1996).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Elijah
See State v. Hanks, 39 Conn. App. 333, 343 , 665 A.2d 102 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 926 , 666 A.2d 1187 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ocasio v. Verdura Construction, LLC
The doctrine pertains ‘‘to the duty to protect invitees upon one’s property when a snowstorm is in progress at the time of [a] plaintiff’s alleged injury.’’ Belevich v. Renaissance I, LLC, 207 Conn. App. 119 , 125, 261 A.3d 1 (2021); see also Sinert v. Olympia & York Development Co., 38 Conn. App. 844, 849 , 664 A.2d 791 (ongoing storm doctrine pertains to landowner or other inviter’s ‘‘duty of care with respect to others’’), cert. denied, 235 Conn. 927 , 667 A.2d 553 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Daniel B.
See, e.g., State v. Hanks , 39 Conn. App. 333 , 341, 665 A.2d 102 ("[the substantial step] standard focuses on what the actor has already done and not what remains to be done" [internal quotation marks omitted] ), cert. denied, 235 Conn. 926 , 666 A.2d 1187 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Daniel B.
See, e.g., State v. Hanks, 39 Conn. App. 333, 341 , 665 A.2d 102 (‘‘[the substantial step] standard focuses on what the actor has already done and not what remains to be done’’ [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 235 Conn. 926 , 666 A.2d 1187 (1995). 7 We agree that our law in this area has been less than clear, and we take this opportunity to clarify.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sachs v. Sachs
A defendant can present a claim of relief from induced error only upon a showing that the error violated his constitutional rights.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Edwards, 39 Conn. App. 242, 251 , 665 A.2d 611 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 924 , 925, 666 A.2d 1186 , 1187 (1995); see also State v. Hanks, 39 Conn App. 333, 344, 665 A.2d 102 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 926 , 666 A.2d 1187 (1995); State v. Youdin, 38 Conn. App. 85, 94 , 659 A.2d 728 , cert. denied, 234 Conn. 920 , 661 A.2d 100 (1995).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
STATE OF CONNECTICUT
v.
JOHN LACCONE
v.
JOHN LACCONE
SC 15257.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
May 1, 1995.
Neal Cone, assistant public defender, in support of the petition.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
Citer courts: Connecticut Superior Court (1)
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 37 Conn. App. 21 (AC 12667), is granted, limited to the following issues:
“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that trial court’s exclusion of Mosman’s letter was proper?
“2. If the answer to the first question is no, was the trial court’s error harmless?”