6 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1984–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
John J. Pitchell v. James F. Callan, Gregory Sargis and City of Hartford, David J. Lesser and Steven Del Sole, Special Mastersgreen1 sentence1998See Pitchell v. Callan, 13 F.3d 545 , 546 (2d. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sestito v. City of Groton
green
1 sentence2018Id., at 522-23 , 423 A.2d 165 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Branzburg v. Hayes
green
2 sentences2003In Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 684 , 92 S. Ct. 2646 , 33 L. 2003In Branzburg v. Hayes, 408 U.S. 665, 684 , 92 S. Ct. 2646 , 33 L. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals
green
2 sentences2001In Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 30 Conn. App. 395, 398 , 620 A.2d 811 (1993), rev’d, 230 Conn. 452 , 645 A.2d 983 (1994), we determined that an August 12, 1986 appeal to a board of appeals was untimely because the thirty day appeal period of § 8-7 began to run on July 11, 1986, the date on which the zoning enforcement officer issued the original zoning permit, and not on August 7, 1986, the date on which a superseding zoning permit was issued. 2001In Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 30 Conn. App. 395, 398 , 620 A.2d 811 (1993), rev’d, 230 Conn. 452 , 645 A.2d 983 (1994), we determined that an August 12, 1986 appeal to a board of appeals was untimely because the thirty day appeal period of § 8-7 began to run on July 11, 1986, the date on which the zoning enforcement officer issued the original zoning permit, and not on August 7, 1986, the date on which a superseding zoning permit was issued. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals
green
2 sentences2001In Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 30 Conn. App. 395, 398 , 620 A.2d 811 (1993), rev’d, 230 Conn. 452 , 645 A.2d 983 (1994), we determined that an August 12, 1986 appeal to a board of appeals was untimely because the thirty day appeal period of § 8-7 began to run on July 11, 1986, the date on which the zoning enforcement officer issued the original zoning permit, and not on August 7, 1986, the date on which a superseding zoning permit was issued. 2001In Koepke v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 30 Conn. App. 395, 398 , 620 A.2d 811 (1993), rev’d, 230 Conn. 452 , 645 A.2d 983 (1994), we determined that an August 12, 1986 appeal to a board of appeals was untimely because the thirty day appeal period of § 8-7 began to run on July 11, 1986, the date on which the zoning enforcement officer issued the original zoning permit, and not on August 7, 1986, the date on which a superseding zoning permit was issued. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Moss v. Stockard
green
1 sentence1996Vereen v. Clayborne, supra, and Moss v. Stockard, supra, adopted a local rule departing explicitly from the common law allocation of the burden of proof as to the issue of falsity — something our state has not done. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Vereen v. Clayborne
green
1 sentence1996Vereen v. Clayborne, supra, and Moss v. Stockard, supra, adopted a local rule departing explicitly from the common law allocation of the burden of proof as to the issue of falsity — something our state has not done. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Ass'n
green
1 sentence1984In Fitzmaurice v. Flynn, 167 Conn. 609, 616-17 , 356 A.2d 887 (1975), we stated that “ ‘[a] physician is under a duty to his patient to exercise that degree of care, skill and diligence which physicians in the same general neighborhood and in the same general line of practice ordinarily possess and exercise in like cases. . . .’[T]he general neighborhood is the entire state of Connecticut.” (Citations omitted.) We point out that while we have since broadened the geographic limita tion to include the entire nation; Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Assn., 191 Conn. 282, 301 , 456 A.2d 294 , (1983); t | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Fitzmaurice v. Flynn
green
2 sentences1984In Fitzmaurice v. Flynn, 167 Conn. 609, 616-17 , 356 A.2d 887 (1975), we stated that “ ‘[a] physician is under a duty to his patient to exercise that degree of care, skill and diligence which physicians in the same general neighborhood and in the same general line of practice ordinarily possess and exercise in like cases. . . .’[T]he general neighborhood is the entire state of Connecticut.” (Citations omitted.) We point out that while we have since broadened the geographic limita tion to include the entire nation; Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Assn., 191 Conn. 282, 301 , 456 A.2d 294 , (1983); t 1984In Fitzmaurice v. Flynn, 167 Conn. 609, 616-17 , 356 A.2d 887 (1975), we stated that “ ‘[a] physician is under a duty to his patient to exercise that degree of care, skill and diligence which physicians in the same general neighborhood and in the same general line of practice ordinarily possess and exercise in like cases. . . .’[T]he general neighborhood is the entire state of Connecticut.” (Citations omitted.) We point out that while we have since broadened the geographic limita tion to include the entire nation; Logan v. Greenwich Hospital Assn., 191 Conn. 282, 301 , 456 A.2d 294 , (1983); t | 1 | 1984–1984 |
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.