28 U.S.C. § 86
Connecticut
Connecticut constitutes one judicial district.
Court shall be held at Bridgeport, Hartford, New Haven, New London, and Waterbury.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 31
cases (28 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: United States v. Francis Curcio, Gus Curcio, Dahill D'OnOfriO & Roberto Garcia, 712 F.2d 1532 (2d Cir. 1983).
United States v. Francis Curcio, Gus Curcio, Dahill D'OnOfriO & Roberto Garcia, 712 F.2d 1532 (2d Cir. 1983). “If a voir dire should reveal that the publicity had created a taint more extensive than we would suppose, remedies such as a continuance or transfer of the trial to one of the four other places in Connecticut where court may be held, Hartford, New Haven, New London and…”
Martin v. Cont'l Cas. Co., 807 F. Supp. 1359 (N.D. Ill. 1992). “See 28 USC § 86 (“Connecticut constitutes one judicial district”).”
De Fries v. Wells Fargo Bank, NA (S.D.N.Y. 2020). “Torrington is located in Litchfield County, in the District of Connecticut, 28 U.S.C. § 86 , and venue thus lies in the District of Connecticut under 28 U.”
Ettiene-Modeste v. Hartford Police Dep't (S.D.N.Y. 2021). “See 28 U.S.C. § 86 . Accordingly, venue lies in the District of Connecticut, 28 U.”
Baker v. Yale Law Sch. (S.D.N.Y. 2022). “See 28 U.S.C. § 86 . Because the Defendant is located in Connecticut, and the events giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims most likely occurred in Connecticut, venue is likely proper in the District of Connecticut.”
Scales v. Webster Bank (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “See 28 U.S.C. § 86 . Accordingly, venue lies in the District of Connecticut, 28 U.”
Comm'r of Motor Vehs. v. Amelio (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “28 U.S.C. § 86 . Removal to this Court was therefore improper.”
Comm'r of Motor Vehs. v. Amelio (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “31, 2017) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 86 ); accord Cardona v. Mohabir, No.”
Sullivan v. Xu (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “In addition, because at least some of the alleged events that are the bases for Plaintiff’s claims occurred in New York County (Manhattan), New York, within this judicial district, see § 112(b), and in Connecticut, which constitutes one judicial district, the District of…”
Friedeberg v. Friedeberg (S.D.N.Y. 2024). “See 28 U.S.C. § 86 . Accordingly, venue lies in the District of Connecticut, 28 U.”
Sullivan v. Xu (E.D.N.Y 2024). “In addition, because at least some of the alleged events that are the bases for Plaintiff’s claims occurred in New York County (Manhattan), New York, within this judicial district, see § 112(b), and in Connecticut, which constitutes one judicial district, the District of…”
Friedeberg v. Friedeberg (D. Conn. 2024). “See 28 U.S.C. § 86 . Accordingly, venue lies in the District of Connecticut, 28 U.”
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.