The registrars of voters or the assistant registrars of voters shall be available for at least one day during the fourteen-day period immediately before all elections for revisions and corrections of the preliminary list which, when completed, shall be termed “the final registry list” for such election. In each municipality, availability of the registrars of voters shall be the posted office hours in such municipality for the registrars of voters.
(1949 Rev., S. 1004; 1953, S. 539d; 1963, P.A. 202; P.A. 75-287, S. 3; P.A. 77-298, S. 1; P.A. 81-350, S. 10, 17; P.A. 83-391, S. 10, 24; P.A. 84-146, S. 5; P.A. 96-134, S. 2, 9; P.A. 11-173, S. 3.)
History: 1963 act placed the fixing of the number of sessions in the registrars rather than the selectmen; P.A. 75-287 added provision that any person whose name has been removed since the last regular election may apply to registrars to add his name to list and further provided that on the third Saturday before a primary, registrars shall hold an additional session to hear requests for adding names, having published notice of such session at least five days in advance; P.A. 77-298 added “fourteenth day” to “third Saturday before a primary” and changed “session” to “sessions”; P.A. 81-350 amended section to require registrars to post notice of sessions to revise and correct preliminary registry list at the office of the town clerk on and after July 1, 1981, and eliminated the procedure whereby electors were permitted to apply to the registrars to have a name added to or deleted from the registry list; P.A. 83-391 deleted reference to board for admission of electors; P.A. 84-146 made technical change re posting of notice on signpost; P.A. 96-134 deleted reference to mandatory session on the third Saturday before a primary and added provision that publication need not be in the form of a legal advertisement, effective May 29, 1996; P.A. 11-173 replaced former provisions with provisions re final registry list and availability of registrars, effective July 13, 2011.
Notes of Decisions
Cheshire Mortg. Serv., Inc. v. Montes, 612 A.2d 1130 (Conn. 1992).
“) § 9-37. The defendants also argue that the plaintiff abdicated its legal responsibility to them when, through a “no-income verification loan program,” it allowed them to determine, without independent documentation of their income, that they could afford to make the mortgage…”
D'ANTUONO v. Serv. Road Corp., 789 F. Supp. 2d 308 (D. Conn. 2011).
“Perillo, Contracts § 9-37 (3d ed.)). In other words, the party usually must show both that there was an absence of meaningful choice on the part of that party, and that the terms of the agreement were unreasonably favorable toward the other party.”
Hirsch v. Woermer, 195 A.3d 1182 (Conn. App. Ct. 2018).
“) § 9-37. Procedural unconscionability is intended to prevent unfair surprise and substantive unconscionability is intended to prevent oppression.”
Rockstone Capital, LLC v. Caldwell, 206 Conn. App. 801 (Conn. App. Ct. 2021).
“1987) § 9-37, p. 399. Procedural unconscionability is intended to prevent unfair surprise and substantive unconsciona- bility is intended to prevent oppression.”
Pierce v. Emigrant Mortg. Co., 463 F. Supp. 2d 221 (D. Conn. 2006).
“) § 9-37). Factors the court may consider in resolving whether a certain interest rate is unconscionable include, but are not limited to, “[t]he financial circumstances of the borrower, the increased risk associated with a second mortgage, and the income-producing capacity of…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.