Blinkoff v. O & G Indus., Inc., 882 A.2d 668 (Conn. 2005). · Go Syfert
Blinkoff v. O & G Indus., Inc., 882 A.2d 668 (Conn. 2005). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
65 citation events (65 in the last 25 years) across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Dowling v. Heirs of Bond (conn, 2022-10-18)
Treatment trajectory · 2005 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2005 2015 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers. How cited ↗
examined Cited "see" Dowling v. Heirs of Bond (4×) also: Cited "see, e.g."
Conn. · 2022 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260, 284 , 873 A.2d 208 (referring to cases involving ‘‘a claim of adverse possession seeking title to the fee of the land over which an easement existed, which claim, if successful, could operate indirectly to extinguish the easement’’ (emphasis omitted)), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 , and cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005); id. (‘‘[i]f there is adverse possession sufficient to divest a fee simple title to land, it will also operate to extinguish an easement in such land’’ (internal quotation marks omitted))…
discussed Cited "see" Labissoniere v. Gaylord Hospital, Inc. (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2020 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260 , 285 n.20, 873 A.2d 208 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005), and cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005). 9 The plaintiffs’ claim brings to mind a story attributed to Abraham Lincoln.
discussed Cited "see" Szymonik v. Szymonik
Conn. App. Ct. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn.App. 260 , 285 n. 20, 873 A.2d 208 (noting this court's policy that precedent set by one panel of this court generally should be overruled only after en banc hearing), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005).
discussed Cited "see" Pellecchia v. Connecticut Light & Power Co. (2×)
Conn. Super. Ct. · 2011 · signal: see · confidence high
See, in contrast, Blinkoff v. O & G Industries, Inc., [ 89 Conn. App. 251, 259 , 873 A.2d 1009 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 907 , 882 A. 2d 668 (2005)] (plaintiff later complied with discovery-requests after prior lack of diligence and lack of adherence to court orders).
discussed Cited "see" Forster v. Gianopoulos (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see · confidence high
In determining the proportionality of a sanction to a violation, we have in the past considered the severity of the sanction imposed and the materiality of the evidence sought; Message Center Management, Inc. v. Shell Oil Products Co., 85 Conn. App. 401, 412 , 857 A.2d 936 (2004); whether the violation was inadvertent or wilful; McVerry v. Charash, 96 Conn. App. 589, 598 , 901 A.2d 69 , cert. denied, 280 Conn. 934 , 909 A.2d 961 (2006); see Blinkoff v. O & G Industries, Inc., 89 Conn. App. 251, 259 , 873 A.2d 1009 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 907 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005); and whether the absence of …
discussed Cited "see" Wieselman v. Hoeniger
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260, 292 , 873 A.2d 208 (trier free to accept or reject, in whole or in part, testimony offered by either party), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005).
cited Cited "see" Mierzejewski v. Brownell
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260, 283 , 873 A.2d 208 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005); Public Storage, Inc. v. Eliot Street Ltd.
discussed Cited "see" Waldman v. Beck
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Waldman v. Jayaraj, 89 Conn. App. 709, 712 , 874 A.2d 860 (summary judgment properly granted in action brought pursuant to General Statutes § 52-592, accidental failure of suit statute, because action not timely filed), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 907 , 882 A.2d 680 (2005).
discussed Cited "see" American Diamond Exchange, Inc. v. Alpert
Conn. App. Ct. · 2007 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260, 292 , 873 A.2d 208 (“[t]he trier is free to accept or reject, in whole or in part, the testimony offered by either party” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005).
discussed Cited "see" Rudder v. MAMANASCO LAKE PARK ASS'N, INC.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260, 284 , 873 A.2d 208 , cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005), distinguishing Goodwin v. Bragaw, 87 Conn. 31 , 86 A. 668 (1913), and Gemmell v. Lee, supra, 59 Conn. App. 572 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Eberhart v. Meadow Haven, Inc.
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
As we noted previously, “the claimant’s possession need notbe absolutely exclusive; it need only be a type of possession which would characterize an owner’s use.” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Roche v. Fairfield, supra, 186 Conn. 502 ; see also Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260 , 289 n.23, 873 A.2d 208 (“[i]n adverse-possession doctrine, the exclusivity requirement describes the behavior of an ordinary possessor and serves to give notice to the owner” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005).
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Robinson (2×)
Conn. App. Ct. · 2008 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Boccanfuso v. Conner, 89 Conn. App. 260 , 285 n.20, 873 A.2d 208 (noting this court’s policy that precedent set by one panel of this court generally should be overruled only after en banc hearing), cert. denied, 275 Conn. 905 , 882 A.2d 668 (2005).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Holly J. Blinkoff Et Al.
v.
O and G Industries, Inc.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 12, 2005.
882 A.2d 668
Everett E. Newton, in support of the petition., Holly J. Blinkoff, pro se, in opposition.
Published

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 89 Conn. App. 251 (AC 24858), is denied.

[*908] Decided September 12, 2005 Everett E. Newton, in support of the petition. Holly J. Blinkoff, pro se, in opposition.