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.
7 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1919–2016 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Varszegigreen2 sentences2016See State v. Varszegi, 33 Conn.App. 368 , 373, 635 A.2d 816 (1993) ("A defendant who acts under the subjective belief that he or she has a lawful claim on property lacks the required felonious intent to steal. 2016See State v. Varszegi, 33 Conn.App. 368 , 373, 635 A.2d 816 (1993) ("A defendant who acts under the subjective belief that he or she has a lawful claim on property lacks the required felonious intent to steal. | 1 | 1 |
Amica Mutual Insurance v. Bartongreen2 sentences1991"Subrogation is the `substitution of one person in the place of another with reference to a lawful claim or right against a third person. `Ballentine's Law Dictionary (3d Ed.); see Amica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Barton, 1 Conn. App. 569 , 572 , 474 A.2d 104 (1984). 1991"Subrogation is the `substitution of one person in the place of another with reference to a lawful claim or right against a third person. `Ballentine's Law Dictionary (3d Ed.); see Amica Mutual Insurance Co. v. Barton, 1 Conn. App. 569 , 572 , 474 A.2d 104 (1984). | 1 | 1 |
Unity Telephone Co. v. Design Service Co.green2 sentences1991See, Unity Telephone Co. v. Design Service Co. Inc., 160 Me. 188 , 192 , 201 A.2d 177 (1964). 1991See, Unity Telephone Co. v. Design Service Co. Inc., 160 Me. 188 , 192 , 201 A.2d 177 (1964). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Staite v. Smith
neutral
2 sentences1985Staite v. Smith, 95 Conn. 470, 472 , 111 A. 799 (1920). 1985Staite v. Smith, 95 Conn. 470, 472 , 111 A. 799 (1920). | 2 | 1966–1985 |
Reed v. Stevens
green
2 sentences1972Reed v. Stevens, 93 Conn. 659 , 662 , defined an encumbrance to be a lawful claim impairing the estate granted. 1966Staite v. Smith, 95 Conn. 470, 472 , 111 A. 799 ; Reed v. Stevens, 93 Conn. 659, 663 , 107 A. 495 . | 2 | 1966–1972 |
State v. Chapman
green
1 sentence2016Such a defendant need not show his mistaken claim of right was reasonable, since an unreasonable belief that he had a right to take another's property will suffice so long as he can establish his claim was made in good faith. " [Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.] ), cert. denied, 228 Conn. 921 , 636 A.2d 851 (1994). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
State v. Haselman
green
1 sentence2016Such a defendant need not show his mistaken claim of right was reasonable, since an unreasonable belief that he had a right to take another's property will suffice so long as he can establish his claim was made in good faith. " [Emphasis added; internal quotation marks omitted.] ), cert. denied, 228 Conn. 921 , 636 A.2d 851 (1994). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Aczas v. Stuart Heights, Inc.
green
2 sentences2000An encumbrance "must be a lawful claim or demand enforceable against the grantee." Aczas v. Stuart Heights, Inc., 154 Conn. 54 , 60 , 221 A.2d 589 (1966). 2000An encumbrance "must be a lawful claim or demand enforceable against the grantee." Aczas v. Stuart Heights, Inc., 154 Conn. 54 , 60 , 221 A.2d 589 (1966). | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Kelsey v. Remer
neutral
1 sentence1919In 15 Corpus Juris, p. 1234, it is said: “As now generally recognized by the courts a covenant against incumbrances is one which has for its object security against those rights to or interests in the land granted which may subsist in third persons to the diminution in value of the estate, although consistent with the passing of the fee.” See also Kelsey v. Remer, 43 Conn. 129 , citing Rawle on Covenants for Title, p. 94. | 1 | 1919–1919 |
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.