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.
5 Connecticut opinions name it 2 courts 1985–1998 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bridge Street Associates v. Water Pollution Control Authority of Suffieldgreen2 sentences1993Evidence of the fact that the special benefit assessment exceeds the special benefit must have actual persuasive effect, in that it convinces the trier that the nonvalidity of the presumption is as probable as its validity. [Katz v. West Hartford, supra 603, n. 3]." Anderson v. Litchfield, supra, 28 ; see Bridge Street Associates, supra, 143-144. 1993The "evidence of the fact that the special benefit CT Page 5918 assessment exceeds the special benefit must have actual persuasive effect, in that it convinces the trier that the nonvalidity of the presumption is as probable as its validity." Anderson v. Litchfield, supra. 28 ; Bridge Street Associates v. Water Pollution Control Authority, 15 Conn. App. 140 , 144 (1988) "The monetary value of the special benefit conferred upon a piece of property by the presence of a sewerage system must be calculated by the difference between the market value of the realty with and without the sewerage system | 1 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Carlson-Lang Realty Co. v. City of Windom
green
2 sentences1998Id. , 29; Carlson-Long Realty Co. v. Windom , 307 Minn. 368 , 240 N.W.2d 517 (1976). 1998Id. , 29; Carlson-Long Realty Co. v. Windom , 307 Minn. 368 , 240 N.W.2d 517 (1976). | 2 | 1996–1998 |
Katz v. Town of West Hartford
green
2 sentences1998Id. , 29; Carlson-Long Realty Co. v. Windom , 307 Minn. 368 , 240 N.W.2d 517 (1976). 1985Id., 603 n.3. | 2 | 1985–1998 |
Anderson v. Town of Litchfield
green
2 sentences1993Evidence of the fact that the special benefit assessment exceeds the special benefit must have actual persuasive effect, in that it convinces the trier that the nonvalidity of the presumption is as probable as its validity. [Katz v. West Hartford, supra 603, n. 3]." Anderson v. Litchfield, supra, 28 ; see Bridge Street Associates, supra, 143-144. 1993The "evidence of the fact that the special benefit CT Page 5918 assessment exceeds the special benefit must have actual persuasive effect, in that it convinces the trier that the nonvalidity of the presumption is as probable as its validity." Anderson v. Litchfield, supra. 28 ; Bridge Street Associates v. Water Pollution Control Authority, 15 Conn. App. 140 , 144 (1988) "The monetary value of the special benefit conferred upon a piece of property by the presence of a sewerage system must be calculated by the difference between the market value of the realty with and without the sewerage system | 2 | 1993–1993 |