green
Positive treatment
7.1 score
Top citers, strongest first. 8 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Commerce Park Associates, LLC v. Robbins
See Tinaco Plaza, LLC v. Freebob’s, Inc., 74 Conn. App. 760, 767 , 814 A.2d 403 (lease is contract and court must construe it in manner that gives effect to every provision), cert. granted, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 840 (2003) (motion to dismiss granted Febru- ary 4, 2004).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Brett B.
See *609 State v. Hoskie , 74 Conn. App. 663 , 673-74, 813 A.2d 136 (declining to speculate how trial court would have responded to timely request for continuance), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003) ; see also State v. Cooke , 134 Conn. App. 573 , 578-79, 39 A.3d 1178 (noting trial court's broad discretion to remedy discovery issues and that rectification of prejudice by granting continuance preferred to suppressing otherwise admissible evidence, " 'a severe sanction which should not be invoked lightly' "), cert. denied, 305 Conn. 903 , 43 A.3d 662 (2012).
discussed
Cited "see"
Pasiakos v. BJ's Wholesale Club, Inc.
See State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 673-74 , 813 A.2d 136 , cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003). 4 *646 II The plaintiff next claims that the court abused its discretion in denying him the opportunity to present evidence of traumatic brain injury.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Sanders
See State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 668 , 813 A.2d 136 , cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003).
cited
Cited "see"
Chyung v. Chi Han Chyung
See State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 669 , 813 A.2d 136 , cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Young
See State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 669 , 813 A.2d 136 , cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Clue v. Commissioner of Correction
See, e.g., State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 674 , 813 A.2d 136 (‘‘we cannot now speculate as to how the court would have responded to a timely request for a continuance’’), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Irizarry
Admission of multiple instances of prior misconduct is not per se *238 improper; see, e.g., State v. Hoskie, 74 Conn. App. 663, 667-70 , 813 A.2d 136 (upholding admission of evidence of four instances of misconduct), cert. denied, 263 Conn. 904 , 819 A.2d 837 (2003); and, furthermore, the misconduct evidence in this case was no more shocking than the evidence of the crimes with which the defendant was charged.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
TINACO PLAZA, LLC
v.
FREEBOB'S, INC.
v.
FREEBOB'S, INC.
SC 16970.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Mar 25, 2003.
Lloyd L. Langhammer, in support of the petition., Kevin J. Burns, in opposition.
Published
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 74 Conn. App. 760 (AC 21992), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court’s granting of summary judgment based upon its determination that a certain lease provision was an option to renew that required the written consent of the plaintiff and the renegotiation of a new rent?”
Lloyd L. Langhammer, in support of the petition. Kevin J. Burns, in opposition. Decided March 25, 2003