Treatment trajectory · 2019 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2019
2022
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "see"
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Bissonnette
See Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Fitz- patrick, 190 Conn. App. 231, 239 , 210 A.3d 88 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 912 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019). ‘‘[W]hether the plaintiff has established a prima facie case [in a foreclosure action] is a question of law, over which our review is plenary.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Financial Freedom Acquisition, LLC v. Griffin, 176 Conn. App. 314, 323 , 170 A.3d 41 , cert. denied, 327 Conn. 931 , 171 A.3d 454 (2017).
discussed
Cited "see"
Quint v. Commissioner of Correction
See Leon v. Commissioner of Correction, 189 Conn. App. 512, 531 , 208 A.3d 296 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 909 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019). 8 In the court’s memorandum of decision, it noted that ‘‘[t]he petitioner testified that he probably still would have accepted the plea deal if his attorneys had not coordinated the sentences to be imposed on the same date. . . . [H]e testified that . . .
discussed
Cited "see"
Zachs v. Commissioner of Correction
See State v. Frye, 224 Conn. 253, 262 , 617 A.2d 1382 (1992) (right to counsel is so basic that its violation mandates rever- sal even if no particular prejudice is shown and even if there is overwhelming evidence of guilt) . . . .’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Newland v. Com- missioner of Correction, 322 Conn. 664 , 699–700, 142 A.3d 1095 (2016) (McDonald, J., dissenting). ‘‘[C]ourts have rarely applied Cronic, emphasizing that only [non- representation], not poor representation, triggers a pre- sumption of prejudice.’’ (Internal quotation marks omit- ted.) Hutton v. Com…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Anthony V.
(2×)
See General Statutes §§ 53a-55 (a) (3) and 53a-55a (a); see also Leon v. Commissioner of Correction, 189 Conn. App. 512, 539 , 208 A.3d 296 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 909 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
In re Juliany T.
Id., 659–60; see also Leon v. Commissioner of Correction, 189 Conn. App. 512, 532 , 208 A.3d 296 (explaining that, in Cronic, court ‘‘estab- lished a narrow exception to the general two part . . . test for determining whether a petitioner’s [sixth amendment] right to the effective assistance of counsel has been violated’’), 14 cert. denied, 332 Conn. 909 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Taylor v. Commissioner of Correction
See, e.g., Leon v. Commissioner of Correction, 189 Conn. App. 512, 528 , 208 A.3d 296 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 909 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Onthank v. Onthank
See, e.g., Mortgage Electronic Registration Sys- tems, Inc. v. Goduto, supra, 110 Conn. App. 373–76; id., 375 (‘‘[a]lthough generally contracts should be enforced as written, we will not require mechanistic compliance with the letter of notice provisions if the particular circumstances of a case show that the actual notice received resulted in no prejudice and fairly apprised the noticed party of its contractual rights’’ (internal quotation marks omitted)); Fidelity Bank v. Krenisky, supra, 72 Conn. App. 713–15 (concluding that notice of default substantially complied with notice p…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Hudson City Savings Bank v. Hellman
Compare Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Fitzpatrick, 190 Conn. App. 231 , 241–42, 210 A.3d 88 (Condron is distinguishable because defen- dants indisputably ‘‘had actual notice of the default and the possibility that they faced a foreclosure because they had been through [a] first foreclosure action and admittedly received the [notice of default] before the first foreclosure action was commenced’’), cert. denied, 332 Conn. 912 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
John B. v. Commissioner of Correction
Id.; see also Leon v. Commissioner of Correction, 189 Conn. App. 512 , 208 A.3d 296 , cert. denied, 332 Conn. 909 , 209 A.3d 1232 (2019).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Penny OUDHEUSDEN
v.
Peter OUDHEUSDEN
v.
Peter OUDHEUSDEN
Supreme Court of Connecticut.
Jun 26, 2019.
Cited by 1 opinion | Published
The plaintiff's petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 190 Conn. App. 169, 209 A.3d 1282 (2019), is granted, limited to the following issues:
"1. Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the trial court had erroneously engaged in 'double dipping" by awarding the plaintiff alimony from income generated by the defendant's businesses and also awarding the plaintiff a percentage of those businesses in its division of property?