green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
7.1 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 2 distinct cases, 2013–2015 ·
…although courts in equitable proceedings often look by analogy to the statute of limitations to determine whether, in the interests of justice, a particular action should be heard, they are by no means obliged to adhere to those time limitations.
⚠ not in text
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Carney v. Horion Investments Ltd.
although courts in equitable proceedings often look by analogy to the statute of limitations to determine whether, in the interests of justice, a particular action should be heard, they are by no means obliged to adhere to those time limitations.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Carney v. Lopez
although courts in equitable proceedings often look by analogy to the statute of limitations to determine whether, in the interests of justice, a particular action should be heard, they are by no means obliged to adhere to those time limitations.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Little
See State v. Virgo, 115 Conn. App. 786, 805 , 974 A.2d 752 (intent to cause physical injury can be inferred from “the events leading up to and immediately following the incident” [internal quotation marks omitted]), cert, denied, 293 Conn. 923 , 980 A.2d 914 (2009).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Bozelko v. Papastavros
See, e.g., Rossman v. Morasco , 115 Conn.App. 234 , 243, 974 A.2d 1 , cert. denied, 293 Conn. 923 , 980 A.2d 912 (2009) ; see also T.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. LaFountain
See, e.g., State v. Virgo, 115 Conn. App. 786, 805 , 974 A.2d 752 (intent to cause physical injury reasonably inferred from defendant’s use of large caliber handgun capable of inflicting serious physical injury), cert, denied, 293 Conn. 923 , 980 A.2d 914 (2009).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Jordan PIKE
v.
Blake BUGBEE et al.
v.
Blake BUGBEE et al.
18456.
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Sep 23, 2009.
Published
Citer courts: D. Connecticut (2)
Juri E. Taalman, Hartford, in support of the petition.
Peter J. Ponziani and Christopher J. Sochacki, Avon, in opposition.
The plaintiff's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 115 Conn.App. 820, 974 A.2d 743 (2009), is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court properly granted the defendant's motion to strike the plaintiff's claims in negligence?
"2. Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court properly granted the defendant's motion to strike the claim of parental liability pursuant to General Statutes § 52-572?"
PALMER and VERTEFEUILLE, Js., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.