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.
8 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2026 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Boddie v. Connecticutgreen1 sentence2026See id., 381 . 40 The plaintiff also argues that the trial court improperly (1) applied the rational basis test to his due process claim instead of the Mathews balancing test, and (2) improperly concluded that he had not addressed whether P.A. 22-134 was justified by a rational legislative purpose. | 1 | 1 |
In re Baby Girl B.green2 sentences2011In re Baby Girl B., 224 Conn. 263, 279 , 618 A.2d 1 (1992) (“the interest of parents in their children is a fundamental constitutional right that undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection” and terminating legal relationship between parent and child is “ ‘a most serious and sensitive judicial action’ ”); In re Juvenile Appeal (Docket No. 10155), 187 Conn. 431, 436 , 446 A.2d 808 (1982) (“the respondent’s interest in retaining his parental rights to his son, is clearly both compelling and constitutionally protected”). 2011In re Baby Girl B., 224 Conn. 263, 279 , 618 A.2d 1 (1992) (“the interest of parents in their children is a fundamental constitutional right that undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection” and terminating legal relationship between parent and child is “ ‘a most serious and sensitive judicial action’ ”); In re Juvenile Appeal (Docket No. 10155), 187 Conn. 431, 436 , 446 A.2d 808 (1982) (“the respondent’s interest in retaining his parental rights to his son, is clearly both compelling and constitutionally protected”). | 1 | 1 |
In Re Juvenile Appealgreen2 sentences2011In re Baby Girl B., 224 Conn. 263, 279 , 618 A.2d 1 (1992) (“the interest of parents in their children is a fundamental constitutional right that undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection” and terminating legal relationship between parent and child is “ ‘a most serious and sensitive judicial action’ ”); In re Juvenile Appeal (Docket No. 10155), 187 Conn. 431, 436 , 446 A.2d 808 (1982) (“the respondent’s interest in retaining his parental rights to his son, is clearly both compelling and constitutionally protected”). 2011In re Baby Girl B., 224 Conn. 263, 279 , 618 A.2d 1 (1992) (“the interest of parents in their children is a fundamental constitutional right that undeniably warrants deference and, absent a powerful countervailing interest, protection” and terminating legal relationship between parent and child is “ ‘a most serious and sensitive judicial action’ ”); In re Juvenile Appeal (Docket No. 10155), 187 Conn. 431, 436 , 446 A.2d 808 (1982) (“the respondent’s interest in retaining his parental rights to his son, is clearly both compelling and constitutionally protected”). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Hector Acevedo-Ramosgreen1 sentence2009Because a defendant has no absolute right to call witnesses or to require the government to present live testimony even at a detention hearing; see, e.g., United States v. Acevedo-Ramos, supra, 755 F.2d at 207-208 ; [16] a defendant *478 has no greater procedural rights when, as in the present case, he remains at liberty pending trial. [17] B The defendant also cannot prevail under the Mathews balancing test. | 1 | 1 |
In Re Candids E.green2 sentences2009See In re Candids E., 111 Conn. App. 210, 216-17 , 958 A.2d 229 (2008). 2009See In re Candids E., 111 Conn. App. 210, 216-17 , 958 A.2d 229 (2008). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Mohammed Abuhamragreen2 sentences2009Applying the Mathews balancing test; id., 318; the Court of Appeals concluded that, as a general matter, principles of due process prohibit a District Court from using materials submitted ex parte and in camera for the purpose of determining whether to grant postconviction bail but that an exception to the prohibition against the use of such materials exists in certain narrowly specified circumstances. 10 Id., 328-29, 332. 2009Applying the Mathews balancing test; id., 318; the Court of Appeals concluded that, as a general matter, principles of due process prohibit a District Court from using materials submitted ex parte and in camera for the purpose of determining whether to grant postconviction bail but that an exception to the prohibition against the use of such materials exists in certain narrowly specified circumstances. 10 Id., 328-29, 332. | 1 | 1 |
Krimstock v. Kellygreen2 sentences2009See id., 253-54 . 2009Krimstock v. Kelly, supra, 464 F.3d at 255 . [12] In support of its determination that, on remand, the Mathews balancing test is applicable, the court also cited approvingly from the following analysis of Judge J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re Shaquanna M.
green
1 sentence2019The court in In Re Shaquanna M. explained that ‘‘the difference in the two analyses [of the abuse of discretion standard and the Mathews balancing test] relates to the lack of discretion involved in providing procedural safeguards to satisfy procedural due process when dealing with the irrevocable severance of a par- ent’s rights, as opposed to the presence of discretion in granting or denying a continuance in the garden vari- ety civil case with its lesser standard of proof.’’ Id., 605 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Santosky v. Kramer
green
2 sentences2016The respondent relies on Santosky v. Kramer , 455 U.S. 745 , 754, 102 S. Ct. 1388 , 71 L. 2016The respondent relies on Santosky v. Kramer , 455 U.S. 745 , 754, 102 S. Ct. 1388 , 71 L. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Parratt v. Taylor
red
1 sentence2015The Mathews balancing test that the plaintiff asks us to utilize in the present case essentially was used by the United States Supreme Court in Parrat v. Taylor, supra, 451 U.S. 527 , Hodel v. Virginia Surface Mining & Reclamation Assn., supra, 452 U.S. 299–301, and other progeny. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
In re Alexander V.
green
2 sentences2014Second, as parens patriae, the state is also interested in the accu- rate and speedy resolution of termination litigation in order to promote the welfare of the affected child.’’ (Citation omitted.) In re Alexander V., 223 Conn. 557, 565 , 613 A.2d 780 (1992). 2014Second, as parens patriae, the state is also interested in the accu- rate and speedy resolution of termination litigation in order to promote the welfare of the affected child.’’ (Citation omitted.) In re Alexander V., 223 Conn. 557, 565 , 613 A.2d 780 (1992). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Remsen v. California
green
2 sentences2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S. Ct. 2089 , 155 L. 2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S.Ct. 2089 , 155 L.Ed.2d 1075 (2003), the court affirmed the judgment of the District Court, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Jesse Hines, who had alleged, inter alia, that he was denied due process when the New York state trial court declined to order an evidentiary hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to second degree murder. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Robinson-Bey v. Briley, Warden
green
2 sentences2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S. Ct. 2089 , 155 L. 2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S.Ct. 2089 , 155 L.Ed.2d 1075 (2003), the court affirmed the judgment of the District Court, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Jesse Hines, who had alleged, inter alia, that he was denied due process when the New York state trial court declined to order an evidentiary hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to second degree murder. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Lancaster v. Finn, Warden
green
2 sentences2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S. Ct. 2089 , 155 L. 2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S.Ct. 2089 , 155 L.Ed.2d 1075 (2003), the court affirmed the judgment of the District Court, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Jesse Hines, who had alleged, inter alia, that he was denied due process when the New York state trial court declined to order an evidentiary hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to second degree murder. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Lopez
green
2 sentences2009E.g., State v. Patterson, supra, 236 Conn. at 569 , 674 A.2d 416 ; State v. Lopez, supra, 235 Conn. at 493 , 668 A.2d 360 . 2009E.g., State v. Patterson, supra, 236 Conn. at 569 , 674 A.2d 416 ; State v. Lopez, supra, 235 Conn. at 493 , 668 A.2d 360 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State v. Patterson
green
2 sentences2009E.g., State v. Patterson, supra, 236 Conn. at 569 , 674 A.2d 416 ; State v. Lopez, supra, 235 Conn. at 493 , 668 A.2d 360 . 2009E.g., State v. Patterson, supra, 236 Conn. at 569 , 674 A.2d 416 ; State v. Lopez, supra, 235 Conn. at 493 , 668 A.2d 360 . | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Medina v. California
green
2 sentences2009In resolving the claim, the court held that the Mathews balancing test did not apply; id., at 443 , 112 S.Ct. 2572 ; concluding, instead, that the standard first identified in Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197, 201-202 , 97 S.Ct. 2319 , 53 L.Ed.2d 281 (1977), was applicable. 2009The asserted right of access does not entail a challenge to the underlying conviction, and neither (at least comfortably) is the state's denial of access equivalent to a state rule of criminal procedure governing the process by which one is tried and found guilty or innocent of criminal offense." Harvey v. Horan, 285 F.3d 298 , 315 n. 6 (4th Cir.2002). [13] It is noteworthy that, in adopting a test for criminal cases that is "far less intrusive" than the Mathews balancing test; Medina v. California, supra, 505 U.S. at 446 , 112 S.Ct. 2572 ; the court in Medina explained that "substantial defer | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Montana v. Egelhoff
green
2 sentences2009In Montana v. Egelhoff 518 U.S. 37, 43 , 116 S. Ct. 2013 , 135 L. 2009In Montana v. Egelhoff 518 U.S. 37, 43 , 116 S. Ct. 2013 , 135 L. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
James Harvey v. Robert F. Horan, Jr., Commonwealth's Attorney, County of Fairfax, Jennifer Thompson Karen R. Pomer Jeri Elster, Amici Curiae
green
1 sentence2009The asserted right of access does not entail a challenge to the underlying conviction, and neither (at least comfortably) is the state's denial of access equivalent to a state rule of criminal procedure governing the process by which one is tried and found guilty or innocent of criminal offense." Harvey v. Horan, 285 F.3d 298 , 315 n. 6 (4th Cir.2002). [13] It is noteworthy that, in adopting a test for criminal cases that is "far less intrusive" than the Mathews balancing test; Medina v. California, supra, 505 U.S. at 446 , 112 S.Ct. 2572 ; the court in Medina explained that "substantial defer | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Jesse Hines v. David Miller, Superintendent
green
2 sentences2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S. Ct. 2089 , 155 L. 2009In the first of these cases, Hines v. Miller, 318 F.3d 157 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 538 U.S. 1040 , 123 S.Ct. 2089 , 155 L.Ed.2d 1075 (2003), the court affirmed the judgment of the District Court, which denied the petition for a writ of habeas corpus of Jesse Hines, who had alleged, inter alia, that he was denied due process when the New York state trial court declined to order an evidentiary hearing on his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to second degree murder. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Patterson v. New York
green
2 sentences2009In resolving the claim, the court held that the Mathews balancing test did not apply; id., 443; concluding, instead, that the standard first identified in Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197, 201-202 , 97 S. Ct. 2319 , 53 L. 2009In resolving the claim, the court held that the Mathews balancing test did not apply; id., 443; concluding, instead, that the standard first identified in Patterson v. New York, 432 U.S. 197, 201-202 , 97 S. Ct. 2319 , 53 L. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.