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 1928–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
| No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. | ||
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Connecticut. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ayala
green
2 sentences2021In any event, ‘‘[b]efore the commencement of trial, a prosecutor has broad authority to amend an information under Prac- tice Book § [36-17]’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Ayala, 324 Conn. 571, 585 , 153 A.3d 588 (2017); and the defendant makes no claim on appeal that the filing of the kidnapping charges by the state was vindictive or otherwise improper. 12 The defendant’s claim of a due process violation is limited to the federal constitution; he makes no claim under the due process provisions of the state constitution. 13 The state also argues in the alternative that the defe 2021In any event, ‘‘[b]efore the commencement of trial, a prosecutor has broad authority to amend an information under Prac- tice Book § [36-17]’’; (internal quotation marks omitted) State v. Ayala, 324 Conn. 571, 585 , 153 A.3d 588 (2017); and the defendant makes no claim on appeal that the filing of the kidnapping charges by the state was vindictive or otherwise improper. 12 The defendant’s claim of a due process violation is limited to the federal constitution; he makes no claim under the due process provisions of the state constitution. 13 The state also argues in the alternative that the defe | 1 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Parker
green
2 sentences2019Our Supreme Court could not have been more clear when it held in State v. Parker , supra, 295 Conn. at 852 , 992 A.2d 1103 , that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the defendant's substantially similar claim. 2019Our Supreme Court could not have been more clear when it held in State v. Parker , supra, 295 Conn. at 852 , 992 A.2d 1103 , that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the defendant's substantially similar claim. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Ortiz
green
2 sentences2010In light of our decision today in State v. Dupigney, supra, 295 Conn. 64 , expressly defining reasonable probability as a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome, the amicus’ claim is unavailing. 9 Additionally, as in Dupigney , because the judge who denied the petition had not presided over the criminal trial, “we need not decide whether the additional deference enunciated in [State v. Ortiz, 280 Conn. 686, 720-21 , 911 A.2d 1055 (2006)] applies to appellate review of petitions under § 54-102kk because the trial judge who reviewed the petition in the present case did not 2010In light of our decision today in State v. Dupigney, supra, 295 Conn. 64 , expressly defining reasonable probability as a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome, the amicus’ claim is unavailing. 9 Additionally, as in Dupigney , because the judge who denied the petition had not presided over the criminal trial, “we need not decide whether the additional deference enunciated in [State v. Ortiz, 280 Conn. 686, 720-21 , 911 A.2d 1055 (2006)] applies to appellate review of petitions under § 54-102kk because the trial judge who reviewed the petition in the present case did not | 1 | 2010–2010 |
State v. Edwards
green
2 sentences1972A substantially similar claim was advanced by the defendant and rejected by this court in the recent case of State v. Edwards, 163 Conn. 527 , 316 A.2d 387 . 1972A substantially similar claim was advanced by the defendant and rejected by this court in the recent case of State v. Edwards, 163 Conn. 527 , 316 A.2d 387 . | 1 | 1972–1972 |
Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co.
green
2 sentences1928Similar rulings were made in Continental Casualty Co. v. Matthis, 150 Ky. 477 , 150 S. W. 507 , where the assured was disabled for three days after the accident, and then permitted by his physician to go to work, but after three days became disabled, and in Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co., 117 Wash. 7 , 200 Pac. 587 . 1928Similar rulings were made in Continental Casualty Co. v. Matthis, 150 Ky. 477 , 150 S. W. 507 , where the assured was disabled for three days after the accident, and then permitted by his physician to go to work, but after three days became disabled, and in Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co., 117 Wash. 7 , 200 Pac. 587 . | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Noble v. Williams
neutral
1 sentence1928Similar rulings were made in Continental Casualty Co. v. Matthis, 150 Ky. 477 , 150 S. W. 507 , where the assured was disabled for three days after the accident, and then permitted by his physician to go to work, but after three days became disabled, and in Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co., 117 Wash. 7 , 200 Pac. 587 . | 1 | 1928–1928 |
Continental Casualty Co. v. Matthis
neutral
1 sentence1928Similar rulings were made in Continental Casualty Co. v. Matthis, 150 Ky. 477 , 150 S. W. 507 , where the assured was disabled for three days after the accident, and then permitted by his physician to go to work, but after three days became disabled, and in Rorabaugh v. Great Eastern Casualty Co., 117 Wash. 7 , 200 Pac. 587 . | 1 | 1928–1928 |
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.