attempt challenge in Connecticut

2020Analy- sis, rather than mere abstract assertion, is required in order to avoid abandon- ing an issue by failure to brief the issue properly.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Ward v. Greene, 267 Conn. 539, 546 , 839 A.2d 1259 (2004).

2020Analy- sis, rather than mere abstract assertion, is required in order to avoid abandon- ing an issue by failure to brief the issue properly.’’ (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Ward v. Greene, 267 Conn. 539, 546 , 839 A.2d 1259 (2004).

2012It was not an attempt to provide an immunity shield for existing state 7 or municipal recreational areas.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id., 674 .

2010Except where otherwise provided, the filing and form of cross appeals, extensions of time for filing them, and all subsequent proceedings shall be the same as though the cross appeal were an original appeal. . . .” 17 We note that Gerte v. Logistec Connecticut, Inc., 283 Conn. 60, 61 , 924 A.2d 855 (2007), like the present case, involved a respondent’s attempt to challenge subject matter jurisdiction underlying previously entered awards.

2010Except where otherwise provided, the filing and form of cross appeals, extensions of time for filing them, and all subsequent proceedings shall be the same as though the cross appeal were an original appeal. . . .” 17 We note that Gerte v. Logistec Connecticut, Inc., 283 Conn. 60, 61 , 924 A.2d 855 (2007), like the present case, involved a respondent’s attempt to challenge subject matter jurisdiction underlying previously entered awards.

2005We also are mindful of the court's observation in Kennedy that a trial judge, "[k]nowing that the granting of the defendant's motion for mistrial would all but inevitably bring with it an attempt to bar a second trial on grounds of double jeopardy... might well be more loath to grant a defendant's motion for mistrial." Id., at 676, 102 S.Ct. 2083 .

2000Additionally, the plaintiff's claim that it is a "holder in due course" is even more tenuous than the assignee's position in Fairfield Credit Corp. v. Donnelly , supra, 158 Conn. 543 .

1982Defense *611 counsel stated that he first became aware that the witness had mental problems on the evening of the day Reed testified on direct examination. 3 While it is recognized that the competency of a witness is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court; State v. Rodriguez, 180 Conn. 382, 389 , 429 A.2d 919 (1980); it is clear that under the circumstances the trial court was in no position to exercise that discretion since the defendant’s attempt to test the witness’ competency was denied.

1982Defense *611 counsel stated that he first became aware that the witness had mental problems on the evening of the day Reed testified on direct examination. 3 While it is recognized that the competency of a witness is a matter peculiarly within the discretion of the trial court; State v. Rodriguez, 180 Conn. 382, 389 , 429 A.2d 919 (1980); it is clear that under the circumstances the trial court was in no position to exercise that discretion since the defendant’s attempt to test the witness’ competency was denied.