green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
4.9 score
“the question of subject matter jurisdiction, because it addresses the basic competency of the court, can be raised by any of the parties, or by the court sua sponte, at any time”
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
Weidenbacher v. Duclos
the question of subject matter jurisdiction, because it addresses the basic competency of the court, can be raised by any of the parties, or by the court sua sponte, at any time
cited
Cited "see"
Dever v. Mack
See Dever v. Ohio, 498 U.S. 1009 , 111 S.Ct. 575 , 112 L.Ed.2d 581 (1990).
discussed
Cited "see"
Ramos v. Town of Vernon
Tomlinson v. Board of Education, 226 Conn. 704, 717-18 , 629 A.2d 333 (1993); see Daley v. Hartford, 215 Conn. 14, 27-28 , 574 A.2d 194 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 982 , 111 S. Ct. 573 , 112 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Dietter v. City of New Milford, No. Cv96-0070416 (Jun. 26, 1996)
Tomlinson v. Board of Education, 226 Conn. 704 , 717-18 , 629 A.2d 333 (1993); see Daley v. Hartford, 215 Conn. 14 , 27-28 , 574 A.2d 194 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 982 , 111 S.Ct. 573 , 112 L.Ed.2d 525 (1990) (the CT Page 4761 question of subject matter jurisdiction, because it addresses the basic competency of the court, can be raised by any of the parties, or by the court sua sponte, at any time)." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Weidenbacher v. Duclos, 234 Conn. 51 , 54 n. 4, 661 A.2d 988 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Segal v. Segal, No. Cv 01 0085042s (Nov. 16, 2001)
"The trial court . . . [can determine] sua sponte that its subject matter jurisdiction [is] in question. . . ." Glastonbury Volunteer Ambulance Assn., Inc. v. Freedom of Information Commission , 227 Conn. 848 , 851 , 633 A.2d 305 (1993); see also Daley v. Hartford , 215 Conn. 14 , 28 , 574 A.2d 194 , cert. denied, 498 U.S. 982 , 111 S.Ct. 573 , 112 L.Ed.2d 525 (1990). ("[T]he question of subject matter jurisdiction . . . can be raised by any of the parties, or by the court sun sponte, at any time."). "[T]he normal interpleader action in Connecticut is an action in which the stakeholder deposit…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
In re Royce
No. 90-184.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Dec 3, 1990.
Consideration, Motion, Took.
Cited by 8 opinions | Published
Citer courts: Supreme Court of Connecticut (1)
ante, p. 806. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed farther herein in forma pauperis granted. Petition for rehearing denied.
Justice Souter took no part in the consideration or decision of this motion and this petition.