green
Positive treatment
5.1 score
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005
2015
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 6 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Rosario
See, e.g., State v. Moore, 85 Conn. App. 7, 11 , 855 A.2d 1006 (claim under plain error doctrine does not warrant review when trial court’s action does not result in any manifest injustice), cert. denied, 271 Conn. 937 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004). 3 We do not consider the court’s January 8, 2020 articulation, which refer- enced the June 17, 2019 hearing on postverdict motions at which the defen- dant testified, in this analysis.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Reinke v. Sing
(2×)
Compare McLoughlin v. McLoughlin , 157 Conn. App. 568 , 575-76 n.5, 118 A.3d 64 (2015) ('we note that the distribution of personal property postdissolution does not implicate the court's subject matter jurisdiction but, rather, its statutory authority'), and Roos v. Roos , 84 Conn. App. 415 , 421-22, 853 A.2d 642 (noting that distribution of personal property postdissolution is question of statutory authority, not subject matter jurisdiction), cert. denied, 271 Conn. 936 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004), with Forgione v. Forgione , [supra, 162 Conn. App. at 6-7, 129 A.3d 766 ] (stating that court lacked …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sousa v. Sousa
Compare McLoughlin v. McLoughlin, 157 Conn. App. 568 , 575–76 n.5, 118 A.3d 64 (2015) (‘we note that the distribution of personal property postdissolution does not implicate the court’s subject matter jurisdiction but, rather, its statutory authority’), and Roos v. Roos, 84 Conn. App. 415 , 421–22, 853 A.2d 642 (noting that distribution of personal prop- erty postdissolution is question of statutory authority, not subject matter jurisdiction), cert. denied, 211 Conn. 936 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004), with Forgione v. Forgione, [supra, 162 Conn. App. 6–7] (stating that court lacked subject…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sousa v. Sousa
(2×)
Compare McLoughlin v. McLoughlin, 157 Conn.App. 568 , 575-76 n. 5, 118 A.3d 64 (2015) ('we note that the distribution of personal property postdissolution does not implicate the court's subject matter jurisdiction but, rather, its statutory authority'), and Roos v. Roos, 84 Conn.App. 415 , 421-22, 853 A.2d 642 (noting that distribution of personal property postdissolution is question of statutory authority, not subject matter jurisdiction), cert. denied, 271 Conn. 936 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004), with Forgione v. Forgione, [supra, 162 Conn.App. at 6-7, 129 A.3d 766 ] (stating that court lacked subje…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Lawrence v. Cords
(2×)
Compare McLoughlin v. McLoughlin, 157 Conn.App. 568 , 575-76 n. 5, 118 A.3d 64 (2015) ("we note that the distribution of personal property postdissolution does not implicate the court's subject matter jurisdiction but, rather, its statutory authority"), and Roos v. Roos, 84 Conn.App. 415 , 421-22, 853 A.2d 642 (noting that distribution of personal property postdissolution is question of statutory authority, not subject matter jurisdiction), cert. denied, 271 Conn. 936 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004), with Forgione v. Forgione, 162 Conn.App. 1 , 6-7, 129 A.3d 766 (2015) (stating that court lacked subject…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
In Re Summer S.
See, e.g., State v. Moore, 85 Conn. App. 7, 11 , 855 A.2d 1006 , cert. denied, 271 Conn. 937 , 861 A.2d 510 (2004).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Michele Roos
v.
Dale Roos, Sr.
v.
Dale Roos, Sr.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Oct 19, 2004.
Daniel H. Kryzanski, in support of the petition., Marianne J. Charles, in opposition.
Published
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 84 Conn. App. 415 (AC 24537), is denied.
[*937] Decided October 19, 2004 Daniel H. Kryzanski, in support of the petition. Marianne J. Charles, in opposition.