exacting standard in Connecticut

61 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1923–2024 3 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 (9)

Case	Followed	Cited
Connell v. Colwellgreen conn · 1990 · cited in 3 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1998 2 sentences 1998See Connell v. Colwell, 214 Conn. 242 ,251, 571 A.2d 116 (1990). 1995Instead, the plaintiff had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of `clear, precise and unequivocal' evidence. [citations omitted]." Bound Brook Association v. Norwalk , 198 Conn. 660 , 665-666 (1986) and cases there cited; see also Connell v. Colwell , 214 Conn. 242 , 250 , 251 (1990); Cutsumpas v. Connecticut Light Power Co. , 16 Conn. App. 108 , 112-113 (1988).	2	3
Lopinto v. Hainesgreen conn · 1981 · cited in 4 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1983–2010 2 sentences 2010Lopinto v. Haines, 185 Conn. 527, 536 , 441 A.2d 151 (1981). 2010Lopinto v. Haines, 185 Conn. 527, 536 , 441 A.2d 151 (1981).	1	4
United States v. Christopher Quezadagreen ca8 · 2006 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2023–2023 1 sentence 2023The reasonable belief standard ‘‘is a less exacting standard than probable cause’’;11 United States v. Que- zada, 448 F.3d 1005, 1007 (8th Cir. 2006); and ‘‘must be applied by reference to the circumstances then con- fronting the officer, including the need for prompt assessment of sometimes ambiguous information con- cerning potentially serious consequences.	1	1
Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Penagreen scotus · 1995 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006	1	1
Fichera v. Mine Hill Corp.green conn · 1988 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
Miller v. Applebygreen conn · 1981 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1995–1995	1	1
Scott v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1978 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984	1	1
Burk v. Corradogreen conn · 1933 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1981–1981	1	1
The United States of America v. Emanuel Lestergreen ca2 · 1957 · cited in 1 Connecticut opinions naming this issue, 1971–1971	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (48)

Case	Cited	Years
Bound Brook Ass'n v. City of Norwalk green conn · 1986 2 sentences 2004Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 2004Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L.	10	1988–2007
Lord Electric Co. v. United States green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2004Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 2002Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence. . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660 , 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S.Ct. 81 , 93 L.Ed.2d 36 (1986).	7	1988–2007
Bartone v. Robert L. Day Co. green conn · 1995 2 sentences 2008Instead, the plaintiffs [must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. 388 We conclude that the plaintiffs failed to present a factual predicate for their claim that the defendant intentionally concealed the facts alleged in their interrogatory response. 2000*Instead, the plaintiffs [have] to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id.	6	1998–2020
Kamer v. United States green scotus · 1986 2 sentences 2004Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 2002Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence. . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660 , 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S.Ct. 81 , 93 L.Ed.2d 36 (1986).	6	1988–2007
Mims v. Jones green · 1917 2 sentences 2004Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 2002Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence. . . ." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660 , 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S.Ct. 81 , 93 L.Ed.2d 36 (1986).	6	1988–2007
Alaimo v. Royer green conn · 1982 2 sentences 1988Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of ‘ “clear, precise, and unequivocal” ’ evidence; Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, supra, 308 ; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 1988Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of ‘ “clear, precise, and unequivocal” ’ evidence; Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, supra, 308 ; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L.	5	1986–1995
Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc. green conn · 1983 2 sentences 1988Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of ‘ “clear, precise, and unequivocal” ’ evidence; Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, supra, 308 ; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 1988Instead, the plaintiffs had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of ‘ “clear, precise, and unequivocal” ’ evidence; Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, supra, 308 ; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 665-66 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L.	3	1986–1995
Puro v. Henry green conn · 1982 2 sentences 1995Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, [ 188 Conn. 301, 308 , 449 A.2d 176 (1982)]; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 666 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L. 1995Beckenstein v. Potter & Carrier, Inc., 191 Conn. 150, 163 , 464 A.2d 18 (1983); Puro v. Henry, [ 188 Conn. 301, 308 , 449 A.2d 176 (1982)]; Alaimo v. Royer, 188 Conn. 36, 39 , 448 A.2d 207 (1982).” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Bound Brook Assn. v. Norwalk, 198 Conn. 660, 666 , 504 A.2d 1047 , cert. denied, 479 U.S. 819 , 107 S. Ct. 81 , 93 L.	3	1988–1995
State v. Winot green conn · 2010 2 sentences 2020Regardless, the defendant’s claim fails even under the more exacting standard of review that applies to penal laws. ‘‘To dem- onstrate that [a statute] is unconstitutionally vague as applied to him, the [defendant] . . . must . . . dem- onstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that [he] had inade- quate notice of what was prohibited or that [he was] the victim of arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Winot, 294 Conn. 753, 759 , 988 A.2d 188 (2010). 2020Regardless, the defendant’s claim fails even under the more exacting standard of review that applies to penal laws. ‘‘To dem- onstrate that [a statute] is unconstitutionally vague as applied to him, the [defendant] . . . must . . . dem- onstrate beyond a reasonable doubt that [he] had inade- quate notice of what was prohibited or that [he was] the victim of arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Winot, 294 Conn. 753, 759 , 988 A.2d 188 (2010).	2	2020–2020
Kaczynski v. Kaczynski green conn · 2009 2 sentences 2017Accordingly, our review is plenary." (Citation omitted.) Kaczynski v. Kaczynski , 294 Conn. 121 , 126, 981 A.2d 1068 (2009). 2017Accordingly, our review is plenary." (Citation omitted.) Kaczynski v. Kaczynski , 294 Conn. 121 , 126, 981 A.2d 1068 (2009).	2	2016–2017
College v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination green mass · 1978 2 sentences 2015However, because discriminatory intent must be shown in such a case, statistical evidence must meet a more exacting standard.); Smith College v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, 376 Mass. 221 , 228 n.9, 380 N.E.2d 121 (1978) (in individual disparate treatment action, gross statistical disparities alone may constitute prima facie proof of a practice of discrimination . . .).’’ (Emphasis in original; footnote omit- ted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Perez-Dickson v. Bridgeport, supra, 517–19. 6 The plaintiff represents in her brief to this court that Davis is not Rastaf- ari 2015However, because discriminatory intent must be shown in such a case, statistical evidence must meet a more exacting standard.); Smith College v. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, 376 Mass. 221 , 228 n.9, 380 N.E.2d 121 (1978) (in individual disparate treatment action, gross statistical disparities alone may constitute prima facie proof of a practice of discrimination . . .).’’ (Emphasis in original; footnote omit- ted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Perez-Dickson v. Bridgeport, supra, 517–19. 6 The plaintiff represents in her brief to this court that Davis is not Rastaf- ari	2	2012–2015
Byrne v. Burke green connappct · 2009 2 sentences 2012Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence.” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009). 3 The first statement on the Discover account was dated May 10, 2004, and showed a balance originating out of a balance transfer from an American Express account on March 30,2004, in the amount of $5000. 2012Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence.” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009). 3 The first statement on the Discover account was dated May 10, 2004, and showed a balance originating out of a balance transfer from an American Express account on March 30,2004, in the amount of $5000.	2	2010–2012
Billie v. Commissioner of Correction green conn · 2009 2 sentences 2012Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence.” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009). 3 The first statement on the Discover account was dated May 10, 2004, and showed a balance originating out of a balance transfer from an American Express account on March 30,2004, in the amount of $5000. 2010Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009).	2	2010–2012
Sostre v. Commissioner of Correction green conn · 2009 2 sentences 2012Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence.” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009). 3 The first statement on the Discover account was dated May 10, 2004, and showed a balance originating out of a balance transfer from an American Express account on March 30,2004, in the amount of $5000. 2010Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.) Byrne v. Burke, 112 Conn. App. 262, 272 , 962 A.2d 825 , cert. denied, 290 Conn. 923 , 966 A.2d 235 (2009).	2	2010–2012
Krondes v. Norwalk Savings Society green connappct · 1999 2 sentences 2009Instead, the [plaintiff] had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Krondes v. 273 Norwalk Savings Society, 53 Conn. App. 102, 113-14 , 728 A.2d 1103 (1999). 2009Instead, the [plaintiff] had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Krondes v. 273 Norwalk Savings Society, 53 Conn. App. 102, 113-14 , 728 A.2d 1103 (1999).	2	1999–2009
Kavarco v. T. J. E., Inc. green connappct · 1984 2 sentences 2008Whether the trial court has held a party to a less exacting standard than that which the law requires is a question of law, and, as such, is reviewable." (Citations omitted; emphasis added.) Id., at 297 , 478 A.2d 257 . 2008Whether the trial court has held a party to a less exacting standard than that which the law requires is a question of law, and, as such, is reviewable.” (Citations omitted; emphasis added.) Id., 297 .	2	1998–2008
Cutsumpas v. Connecticut Light & Power Co. neutral connappct · 1988 2 sentences 1999Instead, the [plaintiff] had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Cutsumpas v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 16 Conn. App. 108, 112-13 , 546 A.2d 962 (1988). 1999Instead, the [plaintiff] had to prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence . . . .” (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Cutsumpas v. Connecticut Light & Power Co., 16 Conn. App. 108, 112-13 , 546 A.2d 962 (1988).	2	1995–1999
Campbell v. Board of Education green conn · 1984 2 sentences 1996Campbell v. Board of Education, 193 Conn. 93, 105 , 475 A.2d 289 (1984).” Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu Partnership v. Bailey, 229 Conn. 312, 319 , 640 A.2d 101 (1994). 1996Campbell v. Board of Education, 193 Conn. 93, 105 , 475 A.2d 289 (1984).” Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu Partnership v. Bailey, 229 Conn. 312, 319 , 640 A.2d 101 (1994).	2	1994–1996
Second Stone Ridge Cooperative Corp. v. City of Bridgeport green conn · 1991 2 sentences 1994To prevail under that statute, "The plaintiff . . . must satisfy the trier . . . there was misfeasance or nonfeasance by the taxing authorities, or the assessment was arbitrary or so excessive or discriminatory as in itself to show a duty on their part." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted.) "Only if the plaintiff is able to meet this exacting test by establishing that the action of the assessors would result in illegality can the plaintiff prevail in an action under sec. 12-119 ." Second Stone Ridge Cooperative Corporation v. Bridgeport, 220 Conn. 335 , 341 , 597 A.2d 326 (1991). 1994To prevail under that statute, "The plaintiff . . . must satisfy the trier . . . there was misfeasance or nonfeasance by the taxing authorities, or the assessment was arbitrary or so excessive or discriminatory as in itself to show a duty on their part." (citation and internal quotation marks omitted.) "Only if the plaintiff is able to meet this exacting test by establishing that the action of the assessors would result in illegality can the plaintiff prevail in an action under sec. 12-119 ." Second Stone Ridge Cooperative Corporation v. Bridgeport, 220 Conn. 335 , 341 , 597 A.2d 326 (1991).	2	1994–1995
Tunick v. Tunick green connappct · 2020 1 sentence 2024Instead, the [plaintiff] [must] prove fraudulent conceal- ment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Tunick v. Tunick, 201 Conn. App. 512, 553 , 242 A.3d 1011 (2020), cert. denied, 336 Conn. 910 , 244 A.3d 561 (2021).	1	2024–2024
Mulvey v. Palo green connappct · 2024 1 sentence 2024In evaluating a claim of adverse possession under that demanding standard, [e]very pre- sumption is in favor of possession in subordination to the title of the true owner.’’ (Citations omitted; empha- sis added; footnote omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Mulvey v. Palo, 226 Conn. App. 495 , 500–502, 319 A.3d 211 (2024), petition for cert. filed (Conn. July 19, 2024) (No. 240124). ‘‘[T]he question of whether the elements of an adverse possession claim have been established by clear and convincing evidence is a factual one subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review.’’ (Interna	1	2024–2024
Washington v. Comm'r of Corr. green conn · 2016 2 sentences 2020Fernwood Realty, LLC v. AeroCi- sion, LLC, 166 Conn. App. 345 , 359–60, 141 A.3d 965 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 912 , 149 A.3d 981 (2016). 2020Fernwood Realty, LLC v. AeroCi- sion, LLC, 166 Conn. App. 345 , 359–60, 141 A.3d 965 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 912 , 149 A.3d 981 (2016).	1	2020–2020
Fernwood Realty, LLC v. Aerocision, LLC. green connappct · 2016 2 sentences 2020Fernwood Realty, LLC v. AeroCi- sion, LLC, 166 Conn. App. 345 , 359–60, 141 A.3d 965 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 912 , 149 A.3d 981 (2016). 2020Fernwood Realty, LLC v. AeroCi- sion, LLC, 166 Conn. App. 345 , 359–60, 141 A.3d 965 , cert. denied, 323 Conn. 912 , 149 A.3d 981 (2016).	1	2020–2020
Weiner v. Clinton green connappct · 2008 2 sentences 2019Instead, the plaintiffs [must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Weiner v. Clinton, 106 Conn. App. 379, 387 , 942 A.2d 469 (2008). 2019Instead, the plaintiffs [must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise, and unequivocal evidence.’’ (Citation omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Weiner v. Clinton, 106 Conn. App. 379, 387 , 942 A.2d 469 (2008).	1	2019–2019
Stuart v. Snyder green connappct · 2010 2 sentences 2018Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence ...." (Emphasis in original; internal quotations marks omitted.) Stuart v. Snyder , 125 Conn. App. 506 , 513, 8 A.3d 1126 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011). 2018Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence ...." (Emphasis in original; internal quotations marks omitted.) Stuart v. Snyder , 125 Conn. App. 506 , 513, 8 A.3d 1126 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011).	1	2018–2018
State v. James green conn · 2011 2 sentences 2018Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence ...." (Emphasis in original; internal quotations marks omitted.) Stuart v. Snyder , 125 Conn. App. 506 , 513, 8 A.3d 1126 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011). 2018Instead, the [plaintiff must] prove fraudulent concealment by the more exacting standard of clear, precise and unequivocal evidence ...." (Emphasis in original; internal quotations marks omitted.) Stuart v. Snyder , 125 Conn. App. 506 , 513, 8 A.3d 1126 (2010), cert. denied, 300 Conn. 921 , 14 A.3d 1005 (2011).	1	2018–2018
State v. Myers green conn · 2009 2 sentences 2017(Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Myers , supra, 290 Conn. at 289 , 963 A.2d 11 . 2017(Internal quotation marks omitted.) State v. Myers , supra, 290 Conn. at 289 , 963 A.2d 11 .	1	2017–2017
State v. Jarzbek green conn · 1987	1	2016–2016
Jovanovic v. United States green scotus · 1988	1	2016–2016
Jensen v. Satran green scotus · 1988	1	2016–2016
Gregory Lumber Co. v. United States green scotus · 1988	1	2016–2016
Curran v. Kroll green connappct · 2009	1	2014–2014
Curran v. Kroll green conn · 2012	1	2014–2014
Falls Church Group, Ltd. v. Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP green conn · 2007	1	2013–2013
Santosky v. Kramer green scotus · 1982	1	2008–2008
B & D Associates Inc. v. Russell green connappct · 2002	1	2002–2002
Fair Cadillac-Oldsmobile Isuzu Partnership v. Bailey green conn · 1994	1	1996–1996
Kilduff v. Adams, Inc. green conn · 1991	1	1995–1995
Halpern v. Board of Education green conn · 1985	1	1993–1993
Wilson v. Kelley green conn · 1992	1	1993–1993

Statutes the citing opinions construe

CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-595 (19) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-577 (13) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-584 (7) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 51-199 (6) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110g (5) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 1-2z (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 10-50 (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 42-110a (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53-21 (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-70 (3) CT § Conn. Gen. Stat. § 8-3 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 179 (1969–2026) NJ 145 (1958–2026) IL 81 (1978–2026) CA 76 (1895–2026) NY 75 (1943–2026) CT 61 (1923–2024) PA 44 (1892–2026) DC 26 (1988–2024) MD 22 (1983–2023) MA 22 (1951–2019) MI 22 (1973–2022) NM 20 (1990–2024) FL 19 (1991–2019) NC 17 (1917–2025) WA 17 (2004–2025) DE 16 (1997–2026) RI 16 (1990–2021) KY 16 (1979–2025) AZ 15 (1996–2022) KS 12 (1938–2025) WI 12 (1975–2025) CO 12 (1988–2026) VA 11 (1998–2024) MN 11 (1972–2025) OH 10 (1984–2025) OR 9 (1954–2021) IA 9 (1970–2020) ND 8 (1986–2014) GA 8 (2000–2025) AK 7 (1976–2024) VT 6 (2005–2023) IN 6 (1973–2012) TN 6 (2003–2021) MO 5 (1885–2024) WV 5 (1988–2021) UT 5 (2002–2019) HI 5 (1964–2020) SD 5 (1978–2018) NV 5 (2015–2021) WY 5 (2019–2025) AL 5 (1893–2024) MS 4 (1966–2021) SC 4 (1962–2024) LA 4 (1989–2008) NH 4 (1970–2015) OK 4 (1946–2016) NE 3 (1966–2015) ME 3 (1984–2020) ID 3 (1977–2007) VI 2 (2013–2013) MT 2 (1999–2003) AR 2 (1974–2015)

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