bar to any claim (Connecticut) · Go Syfert
← Connecticut issues

bar to any claim in Connecticut

8 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 1868–2002 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.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
Dzenutis v. Dzenutisgreen
conn · 1986 · cited in 5 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1991–2002
2 sentences

2002Although General Statutes § 52-504 authorizes the CT Page 9508 recovery of medical expenses in an action solely in behalf of the injured child and makes the recovery in such action a bar to any claim by the parent for such expenses, the statue does not mandate that procedure." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Dzenutis v. Dzenutis , 200 Conn. 290 , 308 , 512 A.2d 130 (1986).

2002Although General Statutes § 52-504 authorizes the CT Page 9508 recovery of medical expenses in an action solely in behalf of the injured child and makes the recovery in such action a bar to any claim by the parent for such expenses, the statue does not mandate that procedure." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Dzenutis v. Dzenutis , 200 Conn. 290 , 308 , 512 A.2d 130 (1986).

15

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Quinn v. Gilormine green
connsuperct · 1975
2 sentences

1986Quinn v. Gilormine, 32 Conn. Sup. 156, 158 , 344 A.2d 275 (1975).

1986Quinn v. Gilormine, 32 Conn. Sup. 156, 158 , 344 A.2d 275 (1975).

11986–1986
Hieble v. Hieble green
conn · 1972
2 sentences

1983Hieble v. Hieble, 164 Conn. 56, 59 , 316 A.2d 777 (1972). *483 With respect to the defendants’ claim that the statute of limitations bars the action, the letter from the defendant Bartlett to the partners of Barwil, Ltd.; see footnote 7, supra; could possibly be construed as a promise to convey the property, thus removing the bar created by the statute of limitations.

1983Hieble v. Hieble, 164 Conn. 56, 59 , 316 A.2d 777 (1972). *483 With respect to the defendants’ claim that the statute of limitations bars the action, the letter from the defendant Bartlett to the partners of Barwil, Ltd.; see footnote 7, supra; could possibly be construed as a promise to convey the property, thus removing the bar created by the statute of limitations.

11983–1983
Mills v. Argall neutral
· 1837
1 sentence

1868In New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvania the provision in question constitutes a separate section and is as follows : “ In case of the insolvency or bankruptcy of the partnership, no special partner shall under any circumstances be allowed to claim as a creditor, until the claims of all the other creditors of the partnership shall be satisfied.” In 1837 Chancellor Walworth in the case of Mills v. Argall, 6 Paige 577 , held that section a bar to any claim for a debt by a special partner, until the claims of other creditors of the partnership were satisfied, and held an assignment preferring suc

11868–1868

Where else courts name it

OK 18 (1928–2020) NY 16 (1889–2005) CT 8 (1868–2002) OH 7 (1900–2017) TX 4 (1906–2016) CA 3 (1941–2001) IL 3 (1987–2020) MD 3 (1929–1936) PA 2 (1936–1968) WV 2 (1949–2019) MO 2 (1913–1927) NC 2 (1993–1999)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check