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.
10 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2003 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 |
|---|---|---|
Parsons v. United Technologies Corp.green2 sentences2003See Parsons v. United Technologies Corp ., 243 Conn. 66 , 76 , 799 A.2d 655 (1997). 2000See Parsons v. United Technologies Corp. , 243 Conn. 66 , 76 , 700 A.2d 655 (1997). | 2 | 2 |
Flagg Bros., Inc. v. Brooksgreen2 sentences2000The court agrees that the plaintiffs have not adequately alleged a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . "`To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.' West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 , 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987); see also Flagg Bros, Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149 , 155 , 98 S.Ct. 1729 , 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978). 2000The court agrees that the plaintiffs have not adequately alleged a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . "`To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.' West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 , 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987); see also Flagg Bros, Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149 , 155 , 98 S.Ct. 1729 , 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Rogers
green
2 sentences2001"To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wilson v. Hryniewicz , 38 Conn. App. 715 , 719-20 , 663 A.2d 1073 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 918 , 665 A.2d 610 (1995). 2001"To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wilson v. Hryniewicz , 38 Conn. App. 715 , 719-20 , 663 A.2d 1073 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 918 , 665 A.2d 610 (1995). | 5 | 1996–2001 |
Wilson v. Hryniewicz
green
2 sentences2001"To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wilson v. Hryniewicz , 38 Conn. App. 715 , 719-20 , 663 A.2d 1073 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 918 , 665 A.2d 610 (1995). 2001"To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Wilson v. Hryniewicz , 38 Conn. App. 715 , 719-20 , 663 A.2d 1073 , cert. denied, 235 Conn. 918 , 665 A.2d 610 (1995). | 5 | 1996–2001 |
West v. Atkins
green
2 sentences2000The court agrees that the plaintiffs have not adequately alleged a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . "`To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.' West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 , 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987); see also Flagg Bros, Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149 , 155 , 98 S.Ct. 1729 , 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978). 2000The court agrees that the plaintiffs have not adequately alleged a violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1983 . "`To state a claim under § 1983, a plaintiff must allege the violation of a right secured by the Constitution and laws of the United States, and must show that the alleged deprivation was committed by a person acting under color of state law.' West v. Atkins, 487 U.S. 42 , 48 , 108 S.Ct. 2250 , 101 L.Ed.2d 40 (1987); see also Flagg Bros, Inc. v. Brooks, 436 U.S. 149 , 155 , 98 S.Ct. 1729 , 56 L.Ed.2d 185 (1978). | 4 | 1995–2000 |
Carbone v. Atlantic Richfield Co.
green
1 sentence1998Sheets v. Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc. , 179 Conn. 471 , 478 (1980); Carbone v. Atlantic Richfield Co. , 204 Conn. 460 , 468 (1987). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Sheets v. Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc.
green
1 sentence1998Sheets v. Teddy's Frosted Foods, Inc. , 179 Conn. 471 , 478 (1980); Carbone v. Atlantic Richfield Co. , 204 Conn. 460 , 468 (1987). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
RK Constructors, Inc. v. Fusco Corp.
green
2 sentences1996"If facts provable under the allegations would support a defense or a cause of action, the motion to strike must be denied." RK Construction, Inc. v. Fusco Corp. , 231 Conn. 381 , 384 , 650 A.2d 153 (1994). 1996"If facts provable under the allegations would support a defense or a cause of action, the motion to strike must be denied." RK Construction, Inc. v. Fusco Corp. , 231 Conn. 381 , 384 , 650 A.2d 153 (1994). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Mead v. Burns
green
2 sentences1994In Mead v. Burns , 199 Conn. 651 , 659 , 509 A.2d 11 (1986), the court held that "claims of unfair settlement practices under CUIPA require a showing of more than a single act of insurance misconduct." The court also held that, in order to bring a CUTPA claim against an insurer based on unfair settlement practices, the plaintiff must allege a violation of CUIPA. 1994In Mead v. Burns , 199 Conn. 651 , 659 , 509 A.2d 11 (1986), the court held that "claims of unfair settlement practices under CUIPA require a showing of more than a single act of insurance misconduct." The court also held that, in order to bring a CUTPA claim against an insurer based on unfair settlement practices, the plaintiff must allege a violation of CUIPA. | 1 | 1994–1994 |
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.