8 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1885–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
Purzycki v. Town of Fairfieldgreen1 sentence2014Although I agree with the majority that, ultimately, the determination of whether the identifiable person- imminent harm exception to the doctrine of qualified immunity is a matter of law; see, e.g., Purzycki v. Fair- field, supra, 244 Conn. 107–108; this court must make this determination in light of the factual findings of the jury. | 1 | 1 |
Willow Funding Co. v. Grencom Associatesgreen2 sentences2008See Willow Funding Co., L.P. v. Grencom Associates, 246 Conn. 615, 623 , 717 A.2d 1211 (1998). 2008See Willow Funding Co., L.P. v. Grencom Associates, 246 Conn. 615, 623 , 717 A.2d 1211 (1998). | 1 | 1 |
James H. Ellis, Jr. v. United States of America, Alfred M. Watkins v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1988The trial court relied on Ellis v. United States, 416 F.2d 791, 799 (D.C. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ramin v. Ramin
green
1 sentence2012Third, we expressly recognized in Ramin that the unique circumstances of that case, that is the defendant's egregious misconduct, which included repeated flouting of orders compelling discovery, required a departure from the general rule that "ordinarily the burden to establish harm is borne by the party who claims the error...." Ramin v. Ramin, supra, at 348 , 915 A.2d 790 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Massey-Ferguson Credit Corp. v. Brown
green
2 sentences2012The court, upon examination of “these particular facts”; id., 261 ; concluded that “the close relationship and participation between the assignor and assignee requires a departure from the general rule of law” prohibiting such affirmative claims. 2012Id., 258 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Ferguson v. City of Charleston
green
1 sentence2002Id., 71 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Smith Barney, Harris Upham & Co. v. Luckie
green
1 sentence1996The Luckie court held that the parties' choice that New York law would govern their arbitration agreement and its enforcement (to use the language of that agreement and the one now before the court) indicates the intention of the parties to arbitrate to the extent allowed by New York law even if application of state law would relieve the parties of their responsibility under the contract to arbitrate, 647 N.E.2d at page 1313 . | 1 | 1996–1996 |
RINKER PORTLAND CEMENT CORP v. Seidel
green
1 sentence1996This is a departure from the general rule that seems to say that courts decide whether a claim to enforce arbitration is timely while the timeliness of the underlying claim should be decided by the arbitrator, Avant Petroleum, Inc. Section Arabian, Inc., 696 F. Sup. 42 (S.D.N.Y., 1988), "Enforcement of Arbitration" 29 C.O.A. 231, 298 (Sec. 22), but see Rinker Portland Cement Co. v. Seidel, 414 So.2d 629 (Fla., 1982). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Holden v. Fitchburg Railroad
green
1 sentence1885Holden v. Fitchburg Railroad Co., 129 Mass., 268 . | 1 | 1885–1885 |
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.