Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1993–2020 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Connecticut courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co.green2 sentences2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav 2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav | 2 | 2 |
Raspberry Junction Holding, LLC v. Southeastern Connecticut Water Authoritygreen2 sentences2020The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Inter- nal quotation marks omitted.) Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital, 272 Conn. 776 , 788–89, 865 A.2d 1163 (2005); see also Raspberry Junction Holding, LLC v. Southeastern Connecticut Water Authority, 331 Conn. 364 , 370–71, 203 A.3d 1224 (2019) (applying strict construction principles to construe text of special act that codified common-law principles and exceptio 2020The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Inter- nal quotation marks omitted.) Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital, 272 Conn. 776 , 788–89, 865 A.2d 1163 (2005); see also Raspberry Junction Holding, LLC v. Southeastern Connecticut Water Authority, 331 Conn. 364 , 370–71, 203 A.3d 1224 (2019) (applying strict construction principles to construe text of special act that codified common-law principles and exceptio | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lynn v. Haybuster Manufacturing, Inc.
green
2 sentences2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav 2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav | 8 | 1993–2017 |
Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc.
green
2 sentences2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav 2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav | 5 | 2003–2017 |
Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital
green
2 sentences2020The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Inter- nal quotation marks omitted.) Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital, 272 Conn. 776 , 788–89, 865 A.2d 1163 (2005); see also Raspberry Junction Holding, LLC v. Southeastern Connecticut Water Authority, 331 Conn. 364 , 370–71, 203 A.3d 1224 (2019) (applying strict construction principles to construe text of special act that codified common-law principles and exceptio 2020The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Inter- nal quotation marks omitted.) Chadha v. Charlotte Hungerford Hospital, 272 Conn. 776 , 788–89, 865 A.2d 1163 (2005); see also Raspberry Junction Holding, LLC v. Southeastern Connecticut Water Authority, 331 Conn. 364 , 370–71, 203 A.3d 1224 (2019) (applying strict construction principles to construe text of special act that codified common-law principles and exceptio | 3 | 2007–2020 |
Vitanza v. Upjohn Co.
green
2 sentences2017The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 381–82; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999); see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 229 Conn. 500, 515 , 642 A.2d 709 (1994) (‘‘[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expresses an intent to hav 2016The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., at 381-82 , 778 A.2d 829 ; Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc. , 249 Conn. 709 , 715, 735 A.2d 306 (1999) ; see also Elliot v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. , 229 Conn. 500 , 515, 642 A.2d 709 (1994) ("[w]e will not interpret a statute to have the effect of altering prior statutory or common law unless the language of the statute clearly expres | 3 | 2004–2017 |
Viera v. Cohen
green
2 sentences2008The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Viera v. Cohen, 283 Conn. 412, 426-27 , 927 A.2d 843 (2007). 2008The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Viera v. Cohen, 283 Conn. 412, 426-27 , 927 A.2d 843 (2007). | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Matthiessen v. Vanech
green
2 sentences2007The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Matthiessen v. Vanech, 266 Conn. 822, 838-39 , 836 A.2d 394 (2003), quoting Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999). 2007The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Matthiessen v. Vanech, 266 Conn. 822, 838-39 , 836 A.2d 394 (2003), quoting Alvarez v. New Haven Register, Inc., 249 Conn. 709, 715 , 735 A.2d 306 (1999). | 2 | 2005–2007 |
State v. Nugent
green
2 sentences2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. 2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. | 2 | 1995–2003 |
Copeland v. Warden, State Prison
green
2 sentences2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. 2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. | 2 | 1995–2003 |
Scrapchansky v. Town of Plainfield
green
2 sentences2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. 2003Scrapchansky v. Plainfield, 226 Conn. 446 , 468 n. 6, 627 A.2d 1329 (1993); Copeland v. Warden, 225 Conn. 46 , 53 , 621 A.2d 1311 (1993); State v. Nugent, 199 Conn. 537 , 548 , 508 A.2d 728 (1986). "`The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law.'" Lynn v. Haybuster Mfg., Inc., 226 Conn. 282 , 290 , 627 A.2d 1288 (1993), quoting 3 J. | 2 | 1995–2003 |
Munroe v. Great American Insurance
green
2 sentences1996The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stabilty [stability] in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." Lynn v. Haybuster Manufacturing, Inc. supra 290; Munroe v. Great American Insurance Company , 234 Conn. 182 , 187 (1995). 1996The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stabilty [stability] in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." Lynn v. Haybuster Manufacturing, Inc. supra 290; Munroe v. Great American Insurance Company, 234 Conn. 182 , 187 (1995). | 2 | 1996–1996 |
State v. Sawyer
green
2 sentences2008The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Viera v. Cohen, 283 Conn. 412, 426-27 , 927 A.2d 843 (2007). [23] We recognize that, in State v. Sawyer, supra, 279 Conn. at 331 -32 n. 1, 904 A.2d 101 , we stated in dicta and without analysis that, "since 2000, the year in which the [code] was adopted, the authority to change the rules of evidence lies with the judges of the Superior Cour 2008The rule that statutes in derogation of the common law are strictly construed can be seen to serve the same policy of continuity and stability in the legal system as the doctrine of stare decisis in relation to case law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Viera v. Cohen, 283 Conn. 412, 426-27 , 927 A.2d 843 (2007). [23] We recognize that, in State v. Sawyer, supra, 279 Conn. at 331 -32 n. 1, 904 A.2d 101 , we stated in dicta and without analysis that, "since 2000, the year in which the [code] was adopted, the authority to change the rules of evidence lies with the judges of the Superior Cour | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Squeglia v. Squeglia
green
2 sentences2003Sutherland, Statutory Construction (5th Ed. Singer 1992 Rev.) § 61.01, pp. 172-73. " Squeglia v. Squeglia, 234 Conn. 259 , 661 A.2d 1007 (1995) footnote 4. 2003Sutherland, Statutory Construction (5th Ed. Singer 1992 Rev.) § 61.01, pp. 172-73. " Squeglia v. Squeglia, 234 Conn. 259 , 661 A.2d 1007 (1995) footnote 4. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.