115 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1985–2026 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Breen v. Phelpsgreen2 sentences2019The law of the case doctrine provides that when "a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance ." (Emphasis added.) Breen v. Phelps , 186 Conn. 86 , 99, 439 A.2d 1066 (1982). 2019The law of the case doctrine provides that when "a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance ." (Emphasis added.) Breen v. Phelps , 186 Conn. 86 , 99, 439 A.2d 1066 (1982). | 3 | 27 |
Lewis v. Connecticut Gaming Policy Boardgreen2 sentences2022See Lewis v. Gaming Policy Board, 224 Conn. 693 , 697–99, 620 A.2d 780 (1993). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent pro- ceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance. . . . 2022See Lewis v. Gaming Policy Board, 224 Conn. 693 , 697–99, 620 A.2d 780 (1993). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent pro- ceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance. . . . | 3 | 7 |
Johnson v. Atkinsongreen2 sentences2010First, we note specifically our disagreement with the defendants’ contention that the law of the case doctrine; see, e.g., Johnson v. Atkinson, 283 Conn. 243, 249-50 , 926 A.2d 656 (2007), overruled in part on other grounds by Jaiguay v. Vasquez, 287 Conn. 323, 348 , 948 A.2d 955 (2008); required the referee to grant the motion to amend, based on Judge Jennings’ previous grant of that same motion. 2010First, we note specifically our disagreement with the defendants’ contention that the law of the case doctrine; see, e.g., Johnson v. Atkinson, 283 Conn. 243, 249-50 , 926 A.2d 656 (2007), overruled in part on other grounds by Jaiguay v. Vasquez, 287 Conn. 323, 348 , 948 A.2d 955 (2008); required the referee to grant the motion to amend, based on Judge Jennings’ previous grant of that same motion. | 3 | 5 |
Rosenblit v. Danahergreen2 sentences1997See Rosenblit v. Danaher, 206 Conn. 125 , 133 , 537 A.2d 145 (1988) (holding that when there is no definitive decision or ruling on a motion, the doctrine of the law of the case in inapplicable). 1997See Rosenblit v. Danaher, 206 Conn. 125 , 133 , 537 A.2d 145 (1988) (holding that when there is no definitive decision or ruling on a motion, the doctrine of the law of the case in inapplicable). | 2 | 4 |
Jaiguay v. Vasquezgreen2 sentences2010First, we note specifically our disagreement with the defendants’ contention that the law of the case doctrine; see, e.g., Johnson v. Atkinson, 283 Conn. 243, 249-50 , 926 A.2d 656 (2007), overruled in part on other grounds by Jaiguay v. Vasquez, 287 Conn. 323, 348 , 948 A.2d 955 (2008); required the referee to grant the motion to amend, based on Judge Jennings’ previous grant of that same motion. 2010First, we note specifically our disagreement with the defendants’ contention that the law of the case doctrine; see, e.g., Johnson v. Atkinson, 283 Conn. 243, 249-50 , 926 A.2d 656 (2007), overruled in part on other grounds by Jaiguay v. Vasquez, 287 Conn. 323, 348 , 948 A.2d 955 (2008); required the referee to grant the motion to amend, based on Judge Jennings’ previous grant of that same motion. | 2 | 3 |
Detar v. Coast Venture XXVX, Inc.green2 sentences2007Furthermore, the court, on remand, [is] bound by the law of the case doctrine. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case upon a retrial, and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Detar v. Coast Venture XXVX, Inc., 91 Conn. App. 263, 266-67 , 880 A.2d 180 (2005). 2007Furthermore, the court, on remand, [is] bound by the law of the case doctrine. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case upon a retrial, and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Detar v. Coast Venture XXVX, Inc., 91 Conn. App. 263, 266-67 , 880 A.2d 180 (2005). | 2 | 3 |
Ratner v. Willametzgreen2 sentences2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). 2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). | 2 | 2 |
| State v. Marianogreen | 2 | 2 |
| Matson Navigation Co. v. Huffgreen | 2 | 2 |
CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhurygreen2 sentences2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). 2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). | 1 | 10 |
Kevin Wagner v. Clark Equipment Co.green2 sentences2004“The law of the case doctrine provides that when a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wagner v. Clark Equipment Co., 259 Conn. 114 , 130 n.21, 788 A.2d 83 (2002). 2004“The law of the case doctrine provides that when a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wagner v. Clark Equipment Co., 259 Conn. 114 , 130 n.21, 788 A.2d 83 (2002). | 1 | 6 |
Carothers v. Capozziellogreen2 sentences2010See Carothers v. Capozziello, 215 Conn. 82, 107 , 574 A.2d 1268 (1990). 2010See Carothers v. Capozziello, 215 Conn. 82, 107 , 574 A.2d 1268 (1990). | 1 | 5 |
McCarthy v. McCarthygreen2 sentences2000According to the doctrine of the law of the case, "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332-33 , 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). 2000According to the doctrine of the law of the case, "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332-33 , 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). | 1 | 4 |
State v. Salmongreen2 sentences2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). 2013If, however, the first decision was not final, but was merely interlocutory, it falls within the doctrine of the law of the case.” CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. Chowdhury, 239 Conn. 375, 403 , 685 A.2d 1108 (1996), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Salmon, 250 Conn. 147, 154-55 , 735 A.2d 333 (1999) (en banc); see also Ratner v. Willametz, 9 Conn. App. 565, 573 , 520 A.2d 621 (1987) (judge not bound to follow rulings or decisions of another judge made at earlier stage of proceedings only when prior decision was interlocutory in nature). | 1 | 3 |
State v. Millergreen2 sentences2019"The law of the case is not written in stone but is a flexible principle of many facets adaptable to the exigencies of the different situations in which it may be invoked." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332, 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). 2000According to the doctrine of the law of the case, "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332-33 , 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
McCarthy v. McCarthygreen2 sentences2019"The law of the case is not written in stone but is a flexible principle of many facets adaptable to the exigencies of the different situations in which it may be invoked." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332, 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). 2000According to the doctrine of the law of the case, "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Emphasis in original; internal quotation marks omitted.) McCarthy v. McCarthy , 55 Conn. App. 326 , 332-33 , 752 A.2d 1093 (1999), cert. denied, 252 Conn. 923 , 752 A.2d 1081 (2000). | 1 | 2 |
| General Electric Capital Corp. of Puerto Rico v. Rizvigreen | 1 | 2 |
| State v. Rossgreen | 1 | 2 |
| Landmark Dev. Grp., LLC v. Water & Sewer Comm'n of the Town of E. Lymegreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Vegagreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Jerzy G.green | 1 | 1 |
| Bank of New York Mellon v. Horseygreen | 1 | 1 |
| State v. Knightgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Brown v. Sohgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Department of Transportation v. White Oak Corp.green | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Wasko v. Manella
green
2 sentences2016The law of the case doctrine provides that "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wasko v. Manella , 87 Conn.App. 390 , 395, 865 A.2d 1223 (2005). 2016The law of the case doctrine provides that "[w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wasko v. Manella , 87 Conn.App. 390 , 395, 865 A.2d 1223 (2005). | 6 | 2005–2016 |
Forte v. Citicorp Mortgage, Inc.
green
2 sentences2003“The law of the case doctrine applies only to subsequent proceedings in the same case. ” (Emphasis in original.) Forte v. Citicorp Mortgage, Inc., 66 Conn. App. 475, 481 , 784 A.2d 1024 (2001). 2003“The law of the case doctrine applies only to subsequent proceedings in the same case. ” (Emphasis in original.) Forte v. Citicorp Mortgage, Inc., 66 Conn. App. 475, 481 , 784 A.2d 1024 (2001). | 5 | 2002–2022 |
Santoro v. Kleinberger
green
2 sentences1993Nonetheless, “[w]e observed in Breen that the law of the case doctrine is not one of unbending rigor when we said: ‘ “A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.” Santoro v. Kleinberger, 115 Conn. 631, 638 , 163 A. 107 (1932).’ [Breen v. Phelps, supra,] 98 . . . .” Rosenblit v. Danaher, 206 Conn. 125, 132-33 , 537 A.2d 145 (1988). 1993Nonetheless, “[w]e observed in Breen that the law of the case doctrine is not one of unbending rigor when we said: ‘ “A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.” Santoro v. Kleinberger, 115 Conn. 631, 638 , 163 A. 107 (1932).’ [Breen v. Phelps, supra,] 98 . . . .” Rosenblit v. Danaher, 206 Conn. 125, 132-33 , 537 A.2d 145 (1988). | 4 | 1988–1995 |
Perugini v. Giuliano
green
2 sentences2018The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance ." (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Perugini v. Giuliano , 148 Conn. App. 861 , 879-80, 89 A.3d 358 (2014). 2018The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or overriding circumstance ." (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Perugini v. Giuliano , 148 Conn. App. 861 , 879-80, 89 A.3d 358 (2014). | 3 | 2015–2018 |
Signore v. Signore
green
2 sentences2015Last, the defendant argues that in denying the motion to strike, Judge Taylor violated the law of the case doctrine because Judge Fuger commented that a motion to strike would be granted if the phone records were offered into evidence and the defendant had not had the records disclosed to him. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subse- quent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or over 2015Last, the defendant argues that in denying the motion to strike, Judge Taylor violated the law of the case doctrine because Judge Fuger commented that a motion to strike would be granted if the phone records were offered into evidence and the defendant had not had the records disclosed to him. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon interlocutorily, the court in a subse- quent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was correctly decided, in the absence of some new or over | 3 | 2009–2015 |
Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn.
green
2 sentences2005“The law of the case principle applies only to those matters essential to the appellate court’s determination, *454 not to mere dictum.” Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn., 184 Conn. 21, 24 , 441 A.2d 49 (1981). “[I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case upon a retrial, and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.” (Emphasis added.) Id., 23 . 2005“The law of the case principle applies only to those matters essential to the appellate court’s determination, *454 not to mere dictum.” Dacey v. Connecticut Bar Assn., 184 Conn. 21, 24 , 441 A.2d 49 (1981). “[I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case upon a retrial, and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.” (Emphasis added.) Id., 23 . | 3 | 2000–2005 |
Westbrook v. Savin Rock Condominiums Ass'n
green
2 sentences2002CT Page 5022 Westbrook v. Savin Rock Condominiums Assn., Inc ., 50 Conn. App. 236 , 240 , 717 A.2d 789 (1998). 2002CT Page 5022 Westbrook v. Savin Rock Condominiums Assn., Inc ., 50 Conn. App. 236 , 240 , 717 A.2d 789 (1998). | 3 | 2001–2002 |
Miller v. Kirshner
green
2 sentences1999Under the law of the case doctrine, “[a] judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Miller v. Kirshner, 225 Conn. 185, 192 , 621 A.2d 1326 (1993). 1999Under the law of the case doctrine, “[a] judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Miller v. Kirshner, 225 Conn. 185, 192 , 621 A.2d 1326 (1993). | 3 | 1994–1999 |
Stones Trail, LLC v. Town of Weston
neutral
2 sentences2020We first set forth our standard of review and relevant legal principles. ‘‘[T]he application of the law of the case doctrine involves a question of law, over which our review is plenary.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stones Trail, LLC v. Weston, 174 Conn. App. 715, 739 , 166 A.3d 832 , cert. denied, 327 Conn. 926 , 171 A.3d 59 (2017). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon inter- locutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was cor 2020We first set forth our standard of review and relevant legal principles. ‘‘[T]he application of the law of the case doctrine involves a question of law, over which our review is plenary.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stones Trail, LLC v. Weston, 174 Conn. App. 715, 739 , 166 A.3d 832 , cert. denied, 327 Conn. 926 , 171 A.3d 59 (2017). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon inter- locutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was cor | 2 | 2020–2022 |
Stones Trail, LLC v. Town of Weston
green
2 sentences2020We first set forth our standard of review and relevant legal principles. ‘‘[T]he application of the law of the case doctrine involves a question of law, over which our review is plenary.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stones Trail, LLC v. Weston, 174 Conn. App. 715, 739 , 166 A.3d 832 , cert. denied, 327 Conn. 926 , 171 A.3d 59 (2017). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon inter- locutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was cor 2020We first set forth our standard of review and relevant legal principles. ‘‘[T]he application of the law of the case doctrine involves a question of law, over which our review is plenary.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Stones Trail, LLC v. Weston, 174 Conn. App. 715, 739 , 166 A.3d 832 , cert. denied, 327 Conn. 926 , 171 A.3d 59 (2017). ‘‘The law of the case doctrine provides that [w]here a matter has previously been ruled upon inter- locutorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case, if it is of the opinion that the issue was cor | 2 | 2020–2022 |
Parker v. Comm'r of Corr.
green
2 sentences2017A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.... [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law." (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Olson v. Mohammadu , 169 Conn.App. 243 , 263, 149 A.3d 198 , cert. denied, 324 Conn. 903 , 151 A.3d 1289 (2016). "[T]he app 2017A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.... [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law." (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Olson v. Mohammadu , 169 Conn.App. 243 , 263, 149 A.3d 198 , cert. denied, 324 Conn. 903 , 151 A.3d 1289 (2016). "[T]he app | 2 | 2017–2020 |
Olson v. Mohammadu
green
2 sentences2017A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.... [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law." (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Olson v. Mohammadu , 169 Conn.App. 243 , 263, 149 A.3d 198 , cert. denied, 324 Conn. 903 , 151 A.3d 1289 (2016). "[T]he app 2017A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision.... [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law." (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Olson v. Mohammadu , 169 Conn.App. 243 , 263, 149 A.3d 198 , cert. denied, 324 Conn. 903 , 151 A.3d 1289 (2016). "[T]he app | 2 | 2017–2020 |
Henderson v. Lagoudis
green
2 sentences2015A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision. . . . [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Henderson v. Lagoudis, 148 Conn. App. 330 , 338–39, 85 A.3d 53 (2014). ‘‘We consider whether a court correctly applied 2015A judge is not bound to follow the decisions of another judge made at an earlier stage of the proceedings, and if the same point is again raised he has the same right to reconsider the question as if he had himself made the original decision. . . . [O]ne judge may, in a proper case, vacate, modify, or depart from an interlocutory order or ruling of another judge in the same case, upon a question of law.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Henderson v. Lagoudis, 148 Conn. App. 330 , 338–39, 85 A.3d 53 (2014). ‘‘We consider whether a court correctly applied | 2 | 2015–2017 |
Gagne v. Vaccaro
green
2 sentences2015Indeed, both the court and the par- ties were bound by the law of the case, as set forth in this court’s earlier decision thereon. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine applies . . . to subsequent proceedings in the same case. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case . . . and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436 , 448 n.11, 835 A.2d 491 (2003), 2012Where a matter has previously been ruled upon interloc-utorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case . . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436, 448-49 , 835 A.2d 491 (2003), cert. denied, 268 Conn. 920 , 846 A.2d 881 (2004). | 2 | 2012–2015 |
Old Kent Mortgage Services, Inc. v. Ford
green
2 sentences2015Indeed, both the court and the par- ties were bound by the law of the case, as set forth in this court’s earlier decision thereon. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine applies . . . to subsequent proceedings in the same case. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case . . . and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436 , 448 n.11, 835 A.2d 491 (2003), 2012Where a matter has previously been ruled upon interloc-utorily, the court in a subsequent proceeding in the case may treat that decision as the law of the case . . . .” (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436, 448-49 , 835 A.2d 491 (2003), cert. denied, 268 Conn. 920 , 846 A.2d 881 (2004). | 2 | 2012–2015 |
Gagne v. Vaccaro
green
2 sentences2015Indeed, both the court and the par- ties were bound by the law of the case, as set forth in this court’s earlier decision thereon. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine applies . . . to subsequent proceedings in the same case. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case . . . and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436 , 448 n.11, 835 A.2d 491 (2003), 2015Indeed, both the court and the par- ties were bound by the law of the case, as set forth in this court’s earlier decision thereon. ‘‘The law of the case doctrine applies . . . to subsequent proceedings in the same case. . . . [I]t is a well-recognized principle of law that the opinion of an appellate court, so far as it is applicable, establishes the law of the case . . . and is equally obligatory upon the parties to the action and upon the trial court.’’ (Citation omitted; emphasis omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Gagne v. Vaccaro, 80 Conn. App. 436 , 448 n.11, 835 A.2d 491 (2003), | 2 | 2012–2015 |
| State v. Daniels green | 2 | 1989–2010 |
| State v. Hubbard green | 2 | 1995–2003 |
| Das v. Rodgers green | 2 | 2001–2001 |
| Johnson v. Statewide Grievance Committee green | 2 | 2001–2001 |
| Fiaschetti v. Nash Engineering Co. green | 2 | 2001–2001 |
| Landmark Dev. Grp., LLC v. Water & Sewer Comm'n of the Town of E. Lyme neutral | 1 | 2026–2026 |
| State v. Harper green | 1 | 2026–2026 |
| State v. Crawford green | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| Roger B. v. Commissioner of Correction green | 1 | 2025–2025 |
| Kellogg v. Middlesex Mutual Assurance Co. green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| State v. Whelan green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Hospital Media Network, LLC v. Henderson green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Emerick v. Emerick green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| DiSesa v. Hickey green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Washington v. United States green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| California v. Tyberg green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Bowen v. Peoples green | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Fazio v. Fazio neutral | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Hryniewicz v. Wilson green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Cumberland Farms, Inc. v. Town of Groton green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Town of Glastonbury v. Sakon green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| State v. Arroyo green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| State v. Rogers green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| State v. Bacon Construction Co. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.