5 Connecticut opinions name it 3 courts 1870–2017 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 |
|---|---|---|
Board of Education v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunitiesgreen2 sentences1991A Fireman’s special defense alleged that Hanover could not recover because it had “failed to file suit within twelve months after inception of the loss in violation of Connecticut General Statute Section 38-97 and Section 38-98.” Hanover correctly observes that the special defense should also have mentioned § 38-100 in order to be in full compliance with Practice Book § 109A. 5 In accordance with the general objectives of our rules of pleading; see Board of Education v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 177 Conn. 75, 77 , 411 A.2d 40 (1979); the practice book section is designed to a 1991A Fireman’s special defense alleged that Hanover could not recover because it had “failed to file suit within twelve months after inception of the loss in violation of Connecticut General Statute Section 38-97 and Section 38-98.” Hanover correctly observes that the special defense should also have mentioned § 38-100 in order to be in full compliance with Practice Book § 109A. 5 In accordance with the general objectives of our rules of pleading; see Board of Education v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 177 Conn. 75, 77 , 411 A.2d 40 (1979); the practice book section is designed to a | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hi-Ho Tower, Inc. v. Com-Tronics, Inc.
green
1 sentence2017Because the jury found that actual loss had been proven, the fact that Com-Tronics did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence the specific amount of the loss should not bar recovery of punitive damages in this case." (Citations omitted; internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Flagg Energy Development Corp. v. General Motors Corp.
red
2 sentences2003The defendant argues that based on Flagg Energy Development Corp. v. General Motors Corp. , 244 Conn. 126 , 709 A.2d 1075 (1998), tort claims for economic loss based on product failure are precluded by the warranty claims under the Uniform Commercial Code. 2003The defendant argues that based on Flagg Energy Development Corp. v. General Motors Corp. , 244 Conn. 126 , 709 A.2d 1075 (1998), tort claims for economic loss based on product failure are precluded by the warranty claims under the Uniform Commercial Code. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. Isacs
green
2 sentences1929It follows from these corrections that the Stenstream lien is an incumbrance prior to the plaintiff’s mortgage unless, as the plaintiff also claims, his mortgage for $5,000 was, in effect, a renewal pro tanto of his original blanket mortgage of $24,000, and as such entitled to reinstatement as prior to the appellant’s lien, under Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. Isacs, 101 Conn. 614 , 127 Atl. 6 . 1929It follows from these corrections that the Stenstream lien is an incumbrance prior to the plaintiff’s mortgage unless, as the plaintiff also claims, his mortgage for $5,000 was, in effect, a renewal pro tanto of his original blanket mortgage of $24,000, and as such entitled to reinstatement as prior to the appellant’s lien, under Lomas & Nettleton Co. v. Isacs, 101 Conn. 614 , 127 Atl. 6 . | 1 | 1929–1929 |
Olmstead v. Bailey
neutral
1 sentence1870In Olmstead v. Bailey, 35 Conn., 584 , this court held that the demand now in suit could not be used, by way of set-off, as a defense to an action on the probate bond, brought in the name of the judge of probate for the benefit of the present defendant, to recover the amount allowed to him by the commissioners, which amount the court of probate had ordered the plaintiffs to pay in full. | 1 | 1870–1870 |
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.