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 1916–2008 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 |
|---|---|---|
Sanford v. Peckgreen1 sentence1997See also Sanford v. Peck, 63 Conn. 486 , 494 (1893) ("`Indeed the price for which an article is bought and sold constitutes its market value and is ordinarily the best and most satisfactory standard by which to estimate the amount at which the same or similar articles are to be appraised in the assessment of damages.'" (Citation omitted.); Barker v. Lewis Storage Transfer Company, 78 Conn. 199 , 200 (1905) ("The CT Page 8116 cardinal rule is that a person injured shall receive fair compensation for his loss or injury and no more. . .Commonly in cases of conversion the loss is the value of the | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Melker v. . City of New York
green
2 sentences1939New York, 190 N. Y. 481, 488 , 83 N.E. 565 , was cited with approval as a satisfactory test for a nuisance: “If the natural tendency of the act complained of is to-create danger and inflict injury upon person or property, it may properly be found a nuisance as matter of fact; but if the act in its inherent nature is so hazardous as to make the danger extreme and serious injury so probable as to be almost a certainty, it should be held a nuisance as matter of law.” The same facts may give rise to an action for negligence and one based on a nuisance. 1939New York, 190 N. Y. 481, 488 , 83 N.E. 565 , was cited with approval as a satisfactory test for a nuisance: “If the natural tendency of the act complained of is to-create danger and inflict injury upon person or property, it may properly be found a nuisance as matter of fact; but if the act in its inherent nature is so hazardous as to make the danger extreme and serious injury so probable as to be almost a certainty, it should be held a nuisance as matter of law.” The same facts may give rise to an action for negligence and one based on a nuisance. | 2 | 1916–1939 |
Jackson v. Bailey
green
1 sentence2008There is hardly anything inevitable about whether disruptive activity occurring during the course of a single trial is viewed as a continuous course of conduct or as a series of isolated instances, and we are at a loss to devise a satisfactory test with which to make that judgment." (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Id. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Gargano v. Heyman
green
1 sentence1997Gargano v. Heyman, 203 Conn. at 620 ; Tait and Laplante's Handbook of Connecticut Evidence, Section 3.1 (2nd Edition 1988). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Gallup v. Smith
green
2 sentences1969The most satisfactory test of whether a statute is mandatory or merely directory “is whether the prescribed mode of action is of the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words whether it relates to matter of substance or to matter of convenience.” International Brotherhoood of Teamsters v. Shapiro, 138 Conn. 57, 68 , 82 A.2d 345 ; Gallup v. Smith, 59 Conn. 354, 358 , 22 A. 334 . 1969The most satisfactory test of whether a statute is mandatory or merely directory “is whether the prescribed mode of action is of the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words whether it relates to matter of substance or to matter of convenience.” International Brotherhoood of Teamsters v. Shapiro, 138 Conn. 57, 68 , 82 A.2d 345 ; Gallup v. Smith, 59 Conn. 354, 358 , 22 A. 334 . | 1 | 1969–1969 |
International Brotherhood of Teamsters of America v. Shapiro
green
2 sentences1969The most satisfactory test of whether a statute is mandatory or merely directory “is whether the prescribed mode of action is of the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words whether it relates to matter of substance or to matter of convenience.” International Brotherhoood of Teamsters v. Shapiro, 138 Conn. 57, 68 , 82 A.2d 345 ; Gallup v. Smith, 59 Conn. 354, 358 , 22 A. 334 . 1969The most satisfactory test of whether a statute is mandatory or merely directory “is whether the prescribed mode of action is of the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words whether it relates to matter of substance or to matter of convenience.” International Brotherhoood of Teamsters v. Shapiro, 138 Conn. 57, 68 , 82 A.2d 345 ; Gallup v. Smith, 59 Conn. 354, 358 , 22 A. 334 . | 1 | 1969–1969 |
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.