Emailed Notice of Decision Not "Personal Service"
The transmission of a notice of employment decision by email does not constitute "personal service" for purposes of triggering the applicable 30-day appeal period.
The transmission of a notice of employment decision by email does not constitute "personal service" for purposes of triggering the applicable 30-day appeal period.
An individual's independent business need not generate outside income in order to satisfy part C of the ABC test for determining whether that individual is an employee or an independent contractor.
Factual disputes precluded finding that decedent's marriage was either valid or invalid.
The terms of a lease precluded finding that a property owner owed a duty of care to persons visiting its leased premises. The court granted summary judgment to the property owner.
The court found no basis for excluding proposed expert testimony regarding the damage caused by defendant's failure to timely diagnose plaintiff's glaucoma.
Allegations of negligence in the dispensing of a prescription sounded in medical malpractice and thus required a certificate of good faith and an opinion letter from a similar health care provider.
Plaintiff's representation by the same law firm that represented defendant in an unrelated matter years before did not merit disqualification.
The parties' lease did not provide for the landlord to withhold a portion of the tenant's security deposit to pay the landlord's attorney fees incurred in commencing, but later withdrawing, eviction proceedings.
The plaintiff's prior successful challenge of a zoning commission decision did not collaterally estop a commission member from subsequently defending claims asserted against her individually.
The plaintiffs in an action alleging violations of a variance and of local zoning regulations were not, on the facts presented, required to exhaust administrative remedies prior to bringing suit.
Homeowners' desire to expand their living space did not constitute the "exceptional difficulty and unusual hardship" required to support the granting of zoning variances.
Two insurers were equally liable for their share of a wrongful death settlement involving multiple insureds.
The defendants could be sued in their individual capacities for torts committed by the LLC in which they were principals.
The record contradicted the defendant's assertion that he never did business with the plaintiff.
Nicaraguan hotel owners' solicitation of business in Connecticut was, under the circumstances presented, sufficient to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction.
There were triable issues of material fact as to a railroad's liability for injuries suffered by a man who trespassed on railroad property.
Triable issues of material fact precluded a grant of summary judgment on the issue of whether an insured made a knowing and material misrepresentation about his health in filling out his application for life insurance.
A hospital employee's complaint about the alleged inappropriate conduct of a physician on a single occasion did not relate to a matter of public concern so as to trigger the protections afforded private employees under CGS §31-51q.
Triable issues of material fact precluded a grant of summary judgment to either plaintiff or defendant in two actions alleging the deceptive marketing of consumer products as "natural."
A defendant may not tender funds to settle an individual plaintiff's claim so as to prevent her from pursuing class claims.
A party's motion for reconsideration was utterly without merit. The court denied the motion.
The inclusion of fire coverage in an all-risk homeowners' policy does not convert that policy into a standard fire insurance policy for purposes of Connecticut law allowing 18 months for the filing of a lawsuit alleging an insurer's breach of such a policy.
Defendant's failure to object to the joinder of charges in the trial court precluded him from challenging joinder on appeal.
Convictions for both sexual assault and attempted sexual assault, arising out of the same incident, violated the prohibition against double jeopardy.
An eyewitness's spontaneous recognition of a perpetrator from a newspaper photograph was not the product of unduly suggestive private conduct so as to bar the admission of her identification at trial.
The defendant failed to establish her affirmative defense of extreme emotional disturbance.
The petitioner failed to show that defense counsel's performance was deficient.
The plaintiff's submission of the high bid in a bidding contest for a restaurant did not obligate the sellers to sell their restaurant to the plaintiff.
A judgment awarding attorney fees to plaintiff was not appealable until the trial court determined the amount of attorney fees to which the plaintiff was entitled.
A hedge fund's amendment of a limited partnership agreement to prevent a limited partner's withdrawal of funds breached their agreement.
The trial court's decision not to instruct the jury on consciousness of guilt was not plain error warranting reversal.
The evidence at defendant's trial was sufficient to prove that he did not hold a valid permit for the handgun found in his possession.
Defendant's inability to provide an address for a missing defense witness was fatal to his claim that the trial court's refusal to issue a material witness warrant deprived him of a fair trial.
The parties' dispute as to what caused plaintiff's injuries amounted to a genuine issue of material fact.
A business operator successfully rebutted a claim that it had control over the stairway leading to the second floor offices that it leased from the property owner.
Multiple facts contravened defendant's claim that it was plaintiff's employer and thus immune from suit for personal injuries sustained by plaintiff on its premises.
The settlement between a stockholder and a public company regarding a proposed merger was fair, reasonable, and adequate.
An opinion letter from a clinical pathologist was insufficient to support a claim of malpractice that focused on the alleged errors of anatomic pathologists.
A genuine dispute as to when plaintiff discovered defendant's involvement in his medical treatment precluded a finding that plaintiff's claims against defendant were time-barred.
Attorney's conduct did not warrant reinstatement to the State Bar.
Party's mere belief that the services provided him would be different than they actually were was insufficient to state a claim for fraud.
Defendants' challenges to the sufficiency of breach of contract and civil theft claims were without merit.
A property owner was not liable to a contractor for work performed for the benefit of its tenant.
Plaintiffs' claims relating to an alleged defect in defendant's microwave oven warranted class certification.
No medical training is required to know that a patient must be prevented from falling off an operating table.
The plaintiff met its burden of showing that at least one allegation in a third-party complaint against possibly fell within the coverage of defendant's liability policy.
A post-doctoral fellow adequately alleged claims of sexual harassment against a medical school based on the conduct of its professor.
A police officer adequately alleged a causal connection between his report of misconduct against a fellow officer and adverse actions taken against him by two of his superiors.
The host of an online auction platform for the purchase and sale of medical supplies violated the Anti-Kickback Statute by charging a seller a fee calculated as a percentage of the proceeds from its sales.
Plaintiffs' and defendants' conflicting testimony precluded the entry of judgment as a matter of law in favor of defendants.
Insurers and insured litigated their respective liability for thousands of personal injury actions arising from exposure to asbestos.
Lavine, Beach, and Bear, Js.
Plaintiff's current action for partition was, in all significant respects, identical to his prior unsuccessful action for partition by sale, and was thus barred by the doctrine of res judicata.
Plaintiff's notice of claim to the City of Stamford adequately identified the location of a manhole alleged to be defective and to have caused an automobile accident in which plaintiff was injured.
Defendant's acquittal as to the most serious of the charges against him undermined his claim that defense counsel was ineffective for failure to request a mistrial on grounds of juror bias.
Plaintiff was the holder of a mortgage with standing to foreclose. The Appellate Court affirmed the trial court judgment granting strict foreclosure.
No evidentiary basis supported the trial court's imposition of a constructive trust on assets owned jointly by a husband and wife as a remedy for wrongdoing by the husband only.
Contingency fees earned by an attorney both during his partnership with another attorney and after that partnership ended, but not paid until after the partnership was dissolved, needed to be divided between the two partners.
The defendant's complaint to the police was insufficient to support causes of action for either malicious prosecution or defamation.
Because the record was insufficient to permit a finding as to whether the claims commissioner considered and adjudicated plaintiff's claim against the State, the court scheduled an evidentiary hearing on that issue.
An attorney was entitled to absolute immunity for her actions in drafting documents on behalf of her client during dissolution proceedings.
A neighboring property owner failed to show that a zoning commission decision approving a high school expansion and renovation project was arbitrary or illegal.
The state's post-secondary education statute does not apply to children for whom an original support order was entered prior to the statute's effective date.
Because a medical expert's opinion submitted in child custody proceedings was absolutely privileged, the court granted his motion to dismiss subsequent claims of blackmail, fraud, and negligence based on the expert's submission of that opinion.
Contested issues of fact as to a lender's alleged misrepresentations to a borrower during loan modification proceedings precluded summary judgment in the lender's favor in an action for foreclosure.
The relationship between two limited liability companies was sufficiently confusing to preclude a grant of summary judgment to the one denying responsibility for alleged negligence.
A motion for extension of time does not apply to the time limitation for filing a motion to dismiss on grounds subject to waiver under §10-32 unless it states such request expressly.
Personal service of appeal from administrative decision had to be completed within the 45 days permitted under the relevant statute.
The complete preemption doctrine applied to a case requiring interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement (CBA), thus triggering federal question jurisdiction.
A service provider's termination of services to a developmentally disabled client did not violate either the integration or free choice mandates of the Medicaid Act.
Finding certain proposed expert testimony to be unreliable, the court granted in part and denied in part plaintiffs' motion to preclude such testimony.
The terms of the parties' collective bargaining agreements assured lifetime medical coverage benefits only to those employees who retired while the agreements were still in effect.
Defendant's failure to investigate racist letters targeting an individual employee supported the employee's claim of discrimination.
Defendant failed to support its objections to plaintiff's discovery requests.
The defendant breached its contractual obligation to inspect and maintain cables suspended from jointly owned utility poles.
An attorney's mishandling of both client funds and the client's cases warranted a two-year suspension from the practice of law.
The probate court lacked jurisdiction to issue special immigration juvenile status findings once the minor who was the subject of the proceedings turned 18.
The trial court loses jurisdiction to hear a new trial motion in a criminal case once sentence has been executed.
The defendant's failure to make an offer of proof in the trial court barred him from arguing on appeal that the trial court's evidentiary ruling deprived him of a fair trial.
Disputes arising over the parties' compliance with a settlement agreement did not warrant either an order vacating the agreement or an order of contempt.
Claimant's current employer was not liable for an injury suffered by claimant while working for a prior employer, which injury continued to cause claimant discomfort.
Mastropietro, Walker, and Salerno
Claimant's employer was not liable for injuries suffered by claimant while using a Ride Share commuter van to travel to work.
Mastropietro, Salerno, and Mlynarczyk
Plaintiffs' expert testimony was sufficient to withstand summary judgment, but insufficient to prove causation with regard to personal injury.
Plaintiffs were barred from relitigating to the jury certain previously dismissed claims.
Disclosure of a confidential informant's identity would jeopardize the informant's safety and would not assist the defense.
A few drops of blood apparently shed by a suspect did not constitute exigent circumstances justifying officers' warrantless entry into his home.
The availability of a postdeprivation remedy at state law precluded a cause of action for violation of an injured party's procedural due process rights.
A dental assistant was entitled to damages from her employer for sexual harassment by a co-worker.
A police officer's use of force to restrain a belligerent and resisting suspect was not unreasonable.
A lender could foreclose on property even if its interest was in tracts that were purportedly subdivided, but which were never actually approved for subdivision.
Family members urged competing interpretations of two family trusts. The court granted defendants' motions for summary judgment and denied plaintiffs' motion.
A genuine issue of material fact as to whether a party's attorney had the authority to execute a promissory note on his behalf precluded a grant of summary judgment.
Plaintiff, who was injured in a school playground, failed to show that her injuries resulted from an imminent harm of which defendants should have been aware.
Under the terms of a lease, the lessee, and not the property owner, was responsible for maintaining a parking lot, and the property owner was not liable for the lessee's alleged failure to keep the lot clear of snow and ice.
The evidence failed to support the State of Connecticut's contention that a state trooper's purported negligence in executing a suspect's arrest was a contributing cause of the injuries sustained by the trooper in that arrest.
A police officer's failure to activate his siren upon initiating a vehicle pursuit raised a triable issue of fact as to whether that failure breached a ministerial duty.
Parties' pleadings raised triable issues of facts as to counsel's failure to investigate a hospital's motives for first promoting and then terminating a physician from its residency program.
A town's plan to modernize its high school, in its current location, required the granting of certain variances from local zoning requirements.
A city stated a viable cause of action for aiding and abetting fraud, among others, based on a defendant's issuance of a false certificate of insurance to a company bidding on a city contract.
Health care providers should not be held liable for negligent infliction of emotional distress based on their act of notifying a patient of a possible medical error.
Husband's claim that some two-thirds of his income as an independent truck driver had to be applied to business expenses was found to be credible.
Sibling minors were neglected and/or abandoned by their parents. The court granted petitions to terminate parental rights as to both minors.
An employer could not be held liable for a supervisor's unforeseeable invasion of an employee's privacy.
A maintenance worker failed to show that he was terminated due to his relationship with a local pastor.
An employer was entitled to damages for an employee's theft of goods. The court rendered judgment in favor of the employer.
The record failed to support the plaintiff's claim that he was terminated from his job as a maintenance man because of his religious affiliation.
A gym member failed to show that the gym either breached its contract with him or violated his civil rights when it released his name to the police.
The court had no subject matter jurisdiction over an appeal from a decision denying a provider's application to participate in the state's Medicaid program.
The trial court properly denied the plaintiff's motion to set aside the jury's verdict in her personal injury case.
The alleged failure of the Department of Children and Families to adequately investigate the possibility of placing a neglected minor with paternal relatives did not preclude termination of parental rights.
A stay was warranted pending resolution of the issue of the board's jurisdiction over an attorney fee dispute.
Walker, Salerno, and Engel
An attorney was negligent in his maintenance of a separate account for client funds and in advocating on behalf of clients.
Plaintiff stated viable causes of action for negligent infliction of emotional distress based legal counsel's alleged breach of fiduciary duty.
A zoning decision that allowed a competing automobile manufacturer to display its products in a retail neighborhood not zoned for auto sales did not aggrieve the members of an automobile retailers association sufficient to give that association standing to challenge the zoning board's decision.
An insurer's release of its subrogation claim against a tortfeasor could not encompass claims by its insured that fell outside the coverage afforded under its policy.
A student who was assaulted outside her school was unable to show that the identifiable person-imminent harm exception applied so as to defeat the school officials' claim of governmental immunity.
A company's inability to show that its salespeople were customarily engaged in the same trade independent of their relationship with the company defeated its claim that the salespeople were independent contractors, rather than employees.
A plaintiff who filed a complaint with the Workers' Compensation Commission (WCC) was barred from seeking the same relief in the court.
The members of a limited liability company failed to show that they had independent interests in the litigation sufficient to confer standing.
Engineering firms that designed the plans for a municipal construction project were in privity with the town for purposes of a contractor's claims against both the town and the engineers that the plans were defective.
A contractor's execution of a lien waiver barred enforcement of its subsequently filed lien.
Special defenses that were supported by specific allegations of fact were legally sufficient.
A homeowner failed to substantiate claims of malfeasance by both the architectural firm and construction company hired to do home improvements.
Defendant's subpoena for an a non-profit association's records, including membership records, infringed the constitutional right of association of those members who were plaintiffs in this action.
The doctrine of abstention precluded entertaining a party's state court application to vacate an arbitration award pending resolution of opposing party's previously filed motion in federal district court to confirm that same award.
Parties' dilatory conduct did not warrant sanctions of barring plaintiff's expert testimony or striking defendants' answers, but also counseled against granting plaintiff's motion to reopen discovery.
An unsuccessful job candidate failed to carry his burden of proof that defendant's method of screening job candidates was discriminatory.
Disclosure of prior employee complaints of sexual misconduct needed to be tailored so as to protect the privacy of those employees.
A wrongfully incarcerated plaintiff's claims of civil rights violations and other torts were time-barred.
A premarital agreement's failure to reference alimony could not be construed as a waiver of any claim to alimony.
Defendant's claims of error in rulings dismissing his motion to open a judgment of strict foreclosure and denying his motion to dismiss the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction were without merit.
Plaintiff failed to show error in the trial court's ruling that it breached its agreement with defendant and was thus liable for defendant's damages.
The parties' conflicting testimony supported a finding that homeowners gave their neighboring homeowners permission to enter their property and remove certain trees.
Homeowner stated viable claim that town foreclosed on his property in order to avoid its liability for damages to the property.
The purchaser of a residential lot breached his sales agreement when he had two truckloads of topsoil hauled away, rather than delivering them to the seller's adjacent lot.
A fence erected along a section of the border between two residential properties impaired the neighbors' enjoyment of their property and served no useful purpose.
A waiver of liability was not binding if the party signing it was not given sufficient time to read it.
A jury award was improper that compensated the plaintiff for neck injuries sustained in an accident, but denied her any compensation for back injuries sustained in the same accident.
Defendant's unsupported opinion was insufficient to constitute a special defense.
The question of whether or not a police officer's reassignment constituted disciplinary action was purely a question of fact and was thus not subject to judicial review.
Tortious interference with expected inheritance is a viable cause of action in Connecticut and does not require a showing of exhaustion of probate court remedies, but must nonetheless be supported by allegations of (1) the existence of an expected inheritance, (2) defendant's knowledge of the expected inheritance, (3) tortious conduct by the defendant, and (4) actual damages resulting from defendant's conduct.
The fair valuation of four parcels of real property was lower than that determined by the city's assessor.
A jury verdict that awarded plaintiff damages for extensive medical treatment but found he suffered no pain or discomfort was inherently flawed, warranting the extraordinary remedy of additur.
Pedestrian who was struck by motor vehicle was entitled to a pre-judgment remedy of $300,000.
A landlord could not reasonably be expected to remediate snow and ice either while a storm was ongoing, or less than 10 minutes after it stopped.
A single prior collision, a written warning, and a felony conviction for tax fraud did not establish a school bus driver's incompetence to drive a motor vehicle.
A dental patient's trip and fall in the dentist's office was not shown to result from the dentist's exercise of medical judgment.
A court order finding defendant had complied with the terms of a settlement barred a second lawsuit making the same allegation of noncompliance.
A police officer placed in an unauthorized position as police lieutenant could not be deemed to have served in that position so as to qualify for a subsequent exam for promotion to captain, even though he sat for and passed the exam.
Husband was entitled to compensation for wife's intentional damage to the marital home prior to vacating.
An incarcerated parent's criminal history, repeated acts of domestic violence in the presence of his minor children, and steadfast refusal to acknowledge the trauma these acts inflicted on his children warranted termination of parental rights.
Wife's cohabitation with her boyfriend did not reduce her expenses so as to justify a reduction in alimony; nonetheless, husband's dire financial situation warranted some relief.
A couple's history of abusing and neglecting the children in their case amply supported their placement on the Department of Children and Families' central registry as persons who pose a risk to children.
An alleged assault victim's testimony at trial undermined the plaintiff's claim of wrongful arrest.
A jury acted within its discretion in awarding plaintiffs only $5 for the contents of their home.
An inadequate showing of probability of prevailing on the merits of its claims warranted denial of a plaintiff's application for prejudgment remedy.
A bailee was liable to the bailor for the value of goods damaged while in his possession.
At issue in this case was whether there was an issue of fact in dispute on the question of jurisdiction and whether it needed to be resolved before the court might rule on the issue of mootness.
An employee who failed to opt-out of her employer's newly instituted arbitration program was bound by that program, and was required to submit her claims to arbitration.
The mere conclusory assertion that a debt was incurred "for personal, family or household purposes" is insufficient to state a claim for violation of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act (FDCPA).
The allegedly erroneous admission of a psychological evaluation was harmless because the trial court would have issued the same ruling even in the absence of the evaluation.
Because failure to name a necessary party does not deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction, the appropriate remedy is to strike, rather than dismiss, the complaint and allow the complainant to replead.
Lack of a transcript defeated defendants' claim that the trial court improperly denied an oral request for a jury trial.
The trial court did not err in ruling on a motion for summary judgment prior to the filing of an answer or special defenses.
Claimant presented credible testimony that his workplace injury was not the result of willful and serious misconduct.
Mastropietro, Walker, and Salerno
The plaintiff, a Connecticut LLC, sued former managing members, alleging failure to pay property taxes, vexatious litigation, civil theft, failure to make various corporate filings, and for attorney's fees.
Plaintiff worked for the defendant company from April 2012 to May 2015 as vice president of human resources and alleged that her supervisor, engaged in a pattern of ongoing and consistent sexual harassment involving her and other female employees.
A medical facility was not vicariously liable for the clinical decisions of a physician who contracted to treat patients at its facility.
Traffic studies pertaining to a proposed development were not shown to be flawed merely for failure to specifically reference all streets in the surrounding community.
A third party's claim of misappropriation of trade secrets was not covered under a business liability policy providing coverage for injuries caused by advertising.
Husband's claim that some two-thirds of his income as an independent truck driver had to be applied to business expenses was found to be credible.
Father's prior assault on minor's half-sibling, in the minor's presence, provided grounds for termination of father's parental rights, and minor's ongoing fear and anxiety regarding father supported that disposition.
The length of the parties' marriage supported an award of alimony to the wife.
Defendant's demeanor belied his claim of not having understood the written (I)Miranda(I) advisement that he read aloud prior to signing.
The superior court lacked jurisdiction to entertain a post-conviction motion to correct that challenged jury instructions given at trial.
A complaint alleging failure to pay a promissory note failed to allege facts sufficient to demonstrate a chain of title from the original payee to the plaintiff.
A homeowner's claims that her lender attempted to foreclose despite having entered into a forbearance agreement warranted an evidentiary hearing.
Plaintiffs failed to carry their burden of proof as to claims that they loaned their son's wife substantial sums of money prior to her divorce from their son.
Plumbing contractor could not recover for unpaid invoices from persons other than the business owner, who was not named as a defendant in his complaint.
Choice of law and arbitration provisions in an agreement unrelated to the plaintiffs' allegations against defendant did not operate to deprive the court of subject matter jurisdiction.
The lack of evidentiary foundation for a medical expert's testimony precluded its admission.
An inadequate and contradictory record undermined the administrative law judge's findings with regard to an application for disability benefits.
Appellee was employed by Appellant and sustained an injury on September 26, 2009.
Appellant was the spouse of a decedent whom died as a result of taking prescription medication taken for a compensable injury.
Plaintiff alleging that an unsolicited fax promoting a free dinner constituted an advertisement in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) was not required at the pleading stage to allege specific facts pertaining to the products or services intended to be promoted at the dinner.
Allegations that a consumer lost a tooth after he bit into ground beef that contained a piece of bone were sufficient to state a claim under Connecticut General Statutes §52-572n of the Connecticut Product Liability Act.
An attorney who failed to protect a client's funds could violate Rule 1.15 of the Rules of Professional Conduct.
A zoning board of appeals could approve a proposal that would reduce the amount of nonconformity.
A genuine issue of material fact existed on whether emergency medical technicians, whose patient was found dead on arrival at the hospital, were grossly negligent.
An individual who was charged with neglect or abuse of a resident of a group home and who resigned could be placed on the abuse-and-neglect registry.
A citizen's complaint that a government agency conducted an "unnoticed or secret meeting" must be filed "not later than thirty days after the person filing the appeal receives notice in fact that such meeting was held," pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §1-206(b)(1).
A court could find one party at greater fault for the breakdown of the marital relationship.
A worker who voluntarily left employment for a cause attributable to the employer could be entitled to unemployment benefits.
Allegations that defendants failed to pay six months of base pay after plaintiff was discharged were sufficient to allege that defendants failed to pay plaintiff's "wages," in violation of Connecticut General Statutes §31-72.
A court could enforce an employment contract that was intended to compensate an employee for loss of benefits that had not yet vested with his former employer.
Genuine issues of material fact existed on whether defendant educational council was responsible to indemnify a physical education teacher who allegedly was assaulted when attempting to break up a fight.
Permitting a closed deposition to continue could result in multiple depositions and become abusive.
A jury court award economic damages for medical expenses and non-economic damages for pain and suffering.
A court could grant defendants' application for protection from foreclosure, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §49-31d.
Courts in the Second Circuit do not conduct James hearings to decide the admissibility of co-conspirators' statements.
A manager who alleged disparate treatment failed to establish she was similarly situated to workers who reported to her.
A mutual promise to arbitrate employment disputes could constitute consideration for the agreement to arbitrate.
Allegations that defendants failed to provide enough medication to an inmate in severe pain, because he developed sores that bled and oozed pus, were sufficient to allege deliberate indifference to a serious medical need.
A court could award reasonable attorney fees to parents who prevailed in an Individuals with Disabilities Education Act case.
Plaintiff failed to prove that defendant's conduct caused or was a substantial factor in causing the drowning death of plaintiff's decedent.
The zoning board of appeals was allowed to add a condition that restricted plaintiff restaurant's hours of operation.
A police officer who was investigating a domestic violence incident did not possess a clear ministerial duty to tow a motor vehicle that had invalid registration and improper plates.
Defense counsel's failure to make an attempt to implicate petitioner's brother in a murder, or to call a witness whose potential testimony would have been inconsistent with that of other witnesses, did not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
Arbitrators could find that a suspension for swearing when off duty was overly harsh. Arbitrators reduced the suspension to a written warning.
Neary, Melita and Murphy
A collective bargaining contract could provide that an employer was required to pay time-and-one-half pay for call back time.
Celentano, Massa and Shea
A board of education was required to challenge arbitrability within 10 days of the initial hearing date.
Kuehnel, Margenot and Gnocchi
Qualified immunity could protect police officers from legal responsibility, provided that their conduct did not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights about which a reasonable individual would have known.
Even if defendant was abused as a child, any abuse was not causally related to the alleged crimes of possession of heroin and a firearm.
An issue may not be relitigated, if the issue previously was fully and fairly litigated, actually decided and the decision was necessary to the judgment.
Allegations that defendant passenger negligently commented about the operation of plaintiff's motorcycle although she knew defendant driver suffered from anxiety, depression and road rage, were insufficient to allege a claim against defendant passenger for aiding a tort.
To prevail on a continuing course of conduct theory, a medical-malpractice plaintiff was required to prove that defendant committed an initial wrong, owed a continuing duty related to the alleged initial wrong and continually breached the duty of care.
A prosecutor was entitled to absolute prosecutorial immunity for his official conduct.
No automatic presumption existed that the mother would automatically win physical custody of the parties' child.
A parent's conduct in furnishing medical treatment and guidance about diet and hygiene could qualify as a material change in circumstances.
A genuine issue of material fact existed on whether plaintiff's 8 percent permanent partial disability qualified as a "disability" under the Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act.
Notice of an expulsion hearing sent to a student's university e-mail address was adequate, even if the student rarely used his university e-mail address.
At a hearing in damages, a court could award economic damages for medical expenses and non-economic damages for pain and suffering.
A plaintiff whose motor vehicle was damaged in a motor-vehicle collision was entitled to damages for loss of value and was not entitled to attorney fees, punitive damages or damages for inconvenience.
A court could enforce a written contract, even if one of the parties claimed that he did not comprehend English.
Defendants' interests were sufficiently similar for them to invoke the co-client attorney-client privilege.
"Stray remarks" by a co-worker that were not related to an employment decision or to the decision making process were insufficient to prove employment discrimination.
Allegations that plaintiff inmate informed a captain about inmates' threats to harm him, because he did not belong to a gang, and that the captain did not act promptly to protect his safety, were sufficient to allege deliberate indifference, in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Allegations that defendants jumped on plaintiff, a pretrial detainee, and kneed his testicles were sufficient to state a claim of excessive use of force, because the alleged conduct failed to serve a legitimate purpose.
A genuine issue of material fact could exist about whether defendants received constructive notice about lack of lighting, if defendants' property manager walked the property twice per day.
An expert appraiser was not credible, because comparable properties that he considered were not age and income restricted and were not truly comparable.
A police officer who was injured on the street outside his home when he was about to leave for work was entitled to workers' compensation benefits.
A juvenile defendant could not be tried as an adult, if the state failed to prove that he was at least 14 years old at the time of the alleged criminal conduct.
Rogers, C. J.
If a criminal defendant challenged a trial court's decision to exclude evidence and did not challenge each independent basis for that decision, his appeal might be moot.
Rogers, C. J.
Residual postgarnishment wages were subject to execution by a judgment creditor after a husband transferred them to his wife.
No proof was required that a structure remain habitable at all times, for the structure to qualify as a "bona fide" residence.
A mayoral campaign was not permitted to solicit or to accept an illegal "straw" contribution in a name other than the contributor's name, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §9-622(7).
A voter who moved to a new address could vote at the polling station that corresponded to that new address, even if the front of the voter's driver's license continued to display the voter's former address.
Connecticut General Statutes §9-621 provided that no individual could make an expenditure for a communication to promote the success or defeat of any candidate's campaign, unless the communication included the disclaimer "paid for by" followed by the individual's name and address.
Plaintiffs failed to produce evidence that a fire department captain knew that a volunteer firefighter posed a danger, that he had a propensity to start fires or that his conduct shocked the contemporary conscience.
Generally, an employee could file a new complaint about events that took place after the filing of the original complaint.
The district court did not commit error when it relied on a co-conspirator's statement to compute defendant's restitution.
The district court did not abuse its discretion when it considered defendant's lack of remorse and risk of committing another criminal offense and did not re-sentence defendant to the bottom of the amended sentencing guidelines range.
To establish a prima facie case of First Amendment retaliation, plaintiff was required to prove constitutionally protected speech, an adverse action and a causal connection between the adverse action and the protected speech.
In a battle of highly qualified experts, a court could find that one real estate appraiser was more credible than another.
A contract signed to reduce the husband's mortgage did not qualify as a postnuptial agreement, because that was not parties' intent, and because the parties had already separated their finances and did not provide full and fair disclosure.
A court could not consider a document that was attached as an exhibit and that was not authenticated.
A horseback rider who alleged that the horse's owner was negligent possessed the burden to prove that his negligence proximately caused her injuries.
A decision to discharge a school principal who allegedly was arrested once for driving under the influence and a second time for public intoxication was not arbitrary, illegal or an abuse of discretion.
A worker established bad faith, because years after the parties' dispute his wages of $27,349 remained unpaid.
A witness failed to establish plaintiff's subpoena was unreasonable or oppressive or that a privilege should apply to protect the information.
A court could award economic damages for medical expenses, and non-economic damages for pain and suffering from a dog bite.
Although evidence existed that, based on the quantity of marijuana and packaging materials, defendant possessed marijuana with intent to sell, the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant intended to sell the marijuana within a school zone.
An individual who allegedly murdered his girlfriend and attempted to conceal his crime could be found guilty of murder and tampering with the evidence.
Ginocchio, J., Vitale, J. and Alexander, J.
A police officer who had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that a driver did not keep within a designated travel lane, in violation of Connecticut General Statutes §14-236, could pull over the driver.
Evidence in the record supported the hearing officer's conclusion that an operator drove his motor vehicle sometime after 9:05 p.m. and that a breath test conducted at 11:05 p.m. took place within two hours of operation.
A plaintiff who did not receive a settlement check promptly, because the original check apparently was taken from counsel's mailbox, was entitled to interest and attorney fees.
A home improvement contract that did not indicate it was signed by a registered contractor and that did not include the contractor's registration number or cancellation notice did not comply with the Home Improvement Act.
A court could admit evidence of prior acts, if the evidence was offered for a proper purpose, was relevant to a disputed issue, and the probative value was greater than the potential for unfair prejudice.
The Mandatory Victims Restitution Act required the entry of a valid conviction and a valid conviction could not enter after the defendant passed away and the Second Circuit vacated the judgment with instructions to dismiss the indictment.
Allegations that the chief of police allowed a cop to continue as lead investigator, although he knew that the cop allegedly coerced witness statements, and that plaintiff was wrongly framed for murder, were sufficient to allege a §1983 civil-rights claim.
A court could forgive the late disclosure of an expert witness, if the expert's testimony was important and a brief trial continuance was feasible.
A Chapter 7 debtor lacked the right to use assets of the bankruptcy estate to compensate his attorney.
A court could approve a settlement offer that resulted from arms-length negotiations and that was above the national average for similar claims.
Absolute immunity could bar a claim of tortious interference with the administration of an estate.
A worker who was scheduled for jury duty, and who took an unauthorized sick day without informing his employer when jury duty was cancelled, engaged in "willful misconduct" and was not entitled to unemployment benefits.
If the jury could not reach a verdict, a court could provide the deadlocked jury a "Chip Smith" jury instruction to consider the majority view.
Employees who were required to work in a higher classification than their normal classification could be entitled to additional pay.
Panagrossi, Culhane and Gnocchi
An alien who proved continuous physical presence in the United States for 10 years could be eligible for cancellation of deportation, pursuant to 8 United States Code §1229b(b)(1)(A).
To establish eligibility for cancellation of removal, a petitioner could be required to establish good moral character, pursuant to 8 United States Code §1229b(b)(1)(B).
The district court possessed the discretion to order a sentence that was substantially longer than the sentence that defendant expected when he pled guilty.
An owner could be qualified to testify about the value of the owner's own property.
Allegations that defendant did not adequately inspect, did not provide adequate warnings and did not create and maintain a safe worksite sounded in common-law negligence and were barred by the exclusivity provision in the Connecticut Product Liability Act.
Considering the number of calls to animal control, and the length of time that the dog's owner resided at the premises, a reasonable jury could conclude that defendant landlords received constructive notice that the dog was an issue.
Allegations that water company workers accused plaintiff property owner of stealing water, and claimed that they took pictures on their camera and had proof, were sufficient to allege negligent infliction of emotional distress, provided that plaintiff proved that distress was so severe it might cause bodily harm.
A worker who allegedly suffered anxiety and emotional distress but no physical injury as a result of an armed robbery at work did not possess a cause of action against her employer.
A court could find that plaintiff tractor-trailer driver's negligence in attempting to use the shoulder of the highway to pass an echelon of plow trucks, caused a collision.
The litigation privilege could provide absolute immunity and prevent a father's defamation claims against a child psychologist who wrote a memo that supported the mother's claims for custody.
A court could discipline an attorney who allegedly agreed to represent three clients and did not take any action to defend them.
Increased nonconformance with municipal zoning regulations was required so that a sea cottage that was damaged as a result of Hurricane Sandy could comply with flood control regulations.
Plaintiffs, who filed a complaint that alleged negligence and fraud, because their landlord allegedly did not provide adequate warmth, were not required to exhaust administrative remedies with the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities.
A coach who was dismissed, or whose coaching job was not renewed, was required to appeal directly to the local or regional board of education, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §10-222e.
A mother was not entitled to recover for loss of earning capacity and lost wages as a result of caring for an injured child.
A clause in a postnuptial agreement that sought to penalize a party who made an attempt to invalidate part of the postnuptial agreement was "unfair, inequitable and unconscionable" and was not enforceable.
A court could find the parties equally at fault for the breakdown of the marital relationship.
A court could find enforce a covenant not to compete that was fair and reasonable.
A court could vacate an arbitrator's decision, if evidence existed that the arbitrator manifestly disregarded or irrationally applied the law.
A court could grant a request for a remittitur, if the award was excessive as a matter of law.
A court could find that transfer to the regular criminal docket was in the best interests of a juvenile who was charged with stealing a motor vehicle and driving directly at a police officer.
A court could decide not to discount the fair value of a minority shareholder's interest in a company, to take into account the lack of liquidity of the closely held company.
A change in senior executives did not qualify as a "change of control," pursuant to the parties' purchase agreement.
A contract with an insurance adjuster service firm did not require that the insurance adjuster service firm perform all the work, only that it "advise and assist" its clients in the resolution of insurance claims.
A marshal served defendant at her "usual place of abode," when the marshal left a copy of the complaint in the front doorway of a vacant house that defendant owned.
Allegations that defendant life insurance company made false representations, failed to follow a required formula, and intended to conceal changes in costs and to increase its profits were sufficient to state a claim.
A court could enforce a broad arbitration clause, in which the parties agreed to arbitrate all claims concerning the application to operate a restaurant franchise.
No objectively reasonable correctional official would have believed that restrictive confinement and transfer to another facility would deprive an inmate of a constitutionally protected liberty interest.
When considering if police used excessive force, a court might examine the severity of the crime, whether the suspect posed an immediate threat to public safety and whether the suspect actively resisted arrest.
A real estate agent who worked on a sale could be a "dual agent," if the real estate agent also represented the buyer.
Failure to disclose favorable evidence could violate a petitioner's right to a fair trial and to due process.
The state Department of Corrections' re-assignment of a locksmith from working at a single correctional facility to working at five facilities did not involve a mandatory subject of bargaining.
Battey, Low and Dellapina
A party alleging the formation of an easement by prescription was required to prove that use of the subject property had been open, visible, continuous and uninterrupted for 15 years and made under a claim of right.
In an action between commercial parties, the Connecticut Product Liability Act did not permit recovery for commercial loss caused by a product.
Allegations that respondent routinely used his cell to film or tape a neighbor and her children when they were outside were insufficient to allege that respondent knew he would cause them to feel a reasonable fear for their physical safety.
Allegations that a boss falsely informed co-workers at a staff meeting that plaintiff was a drug addict and was being treated for drug addiction could be sufficient to state a claim for defamation.
An owner who proved that a dog was a "good or chattel" and that he possessed a property interest as a result of the bill of sale and medical expenses that he paid, could be entitled to the return of the dog.
A board-certified plastic surgeon qualified as a "similar health care provider" to a board-certified cosmetic surgeon, for purposes of Connecticut General Statutes §52-190a.
A court could modify child support as a result of a change in circumstances, such as loss of employment as a result of a heart attack.
At a hearing in damages, a court could award economic and noneconomic damages to a state trooper who allegedly was injured when attempting to make a motorist stop.
A guarantor could be bound by the waiver of a trial by jury in a loan contract, and the court extended that concept to a commercial lease.
Absent allegations about the duty owed or the role that defendant allegedly played, a complaint might be insufficient to state a legal claim.
A complaint for injunctive relief in connection with an ordinance that required owner occupancy of rooming houses might not be moot, if the city's allegedly offensive conduct could take place again.
The administrative law judge failed to explain why she found that claimant's epilepsy did not qualify as a listed impairment and why she did not credit the opinion of claimant's treating physician.
A court could find that an inference of discrimination existed, if an employer criticized an employee in ethnically degrading terms, made invidious comments about others in the employee's protected group, or treated individuals not in the protected group more favorably.
Although a supervisor allegedly commented about plaintiff's accent, plaintiff, who was from Africa, failed to prove that discrimination, as opposed to concerns about oral communication skills, motivated the supervisor.
Parties were entitled to discovery concerning any nonprivileged matters that were relevant to their claims or defenses, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(b)(1), but not if discovery requests were overly broad and burdensome.
The majority of the Connecticut Supreme Court affirmed its allegiance to §402A of the Restatement (Second) and its consumer expectation test and renamed the modified consumer expectation test the "risk-utility" test.
To obtain mandatory disbarment of an attorney pursuant to Practice Book §2-47A, disciplinary counsel must prove that the attorney knowingly and intentionally intended to steal client funds.
The Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection's issuance of a comprehensive energy strategy and its subsequent approval of a plan to expand the use of natural gas did not constitute "actions which may significantly affect the environment," for purposes of Connecticut General Statutes §22a-1b(c) and require an environmental impact statement.
A 20-minute delay in a voter's ability to use the alternative voting system for disabled individuals did not result from failure to train elections officials or to test the AVS machine.
A registrars of voters office that initially informed a citizen that he could not change his registration during the week before the presidential preference primary, and then permitted the citizen to change his registration later that day, did not violate Connecticut General Statutes §9-57.
An unaffiliated voter who registered as a Democrat on the date of the presidential preference primary was not allowed to vote.
A decision to convene in executive session to discuss pending litigation did not violate the Freedom of Information Act, even if an intervenor was excluded from the meeting.
Freedom of Information Commission
A board of education could meet in executive session, without violating Connecticut General Statutes §1-200(6), if the executive session were held to discuss a worker's progress toward a goal.
Freedom of Information Commission
A parent who requested records about the alleged child abuse of his own child pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act requested the records as a member of the public, as opposed to as a parent, and the records were exempt from disclosure.
Freedom of Information Commission
Absent a request to preserve, a police department was not required to keep a tape from a dashboard camera in a police cruiser more than 30 days.
Freedom of Information Commission
Disclosure of part of an attorney's report in meeting minutes could waive the attorney-client privilege.
Freedom of Information Commission
A duty to disclose could exist, if a seller deliberately hid defects or concealed a material fact from a buyer. Plaintiff failed to adequately allege a false statement or fraudulent intent, and the Second Circuit affirmed the judgment of the district court.
A court could suspend an attorney who allegedly refused to comply with an order by the Statewide Grievance Committee to cooperate with an audit and to take continuing legal education courses.
A court could award offer-of-compromise interest from the date of plaintiff's offer to the date that the verdict was accepted.
Connecticut General Statutes §52-557b(b) of the Good Samaritan Act did not apply to "for-profit" business entities that provided emergency medical services.
A state marshal was not entitled to park in a "no parking" zone, unless that was reasonably necessary for him to perform his official responsibilities.
A court could award child support, plus costs of daycare and unreimbursed medical expenses to a mother.
At a hearing in damages, a court could award economic damages for medical expenses and non-economic damages for pain and suffering that a customer allegedly experienced when an employee threw a bottle.
Plaintiffs were required to exhaust administrative remedies, before they protested the Department of Social Services' policy change.
Although plaintiff maintained that the similarity between two back massagers was sufficient to allege unfair competition because of the likelihood of confusion, without a valid trademark plaintiff failed to allege a claim for unfair competition.
RICO did not contain an express waiver of sovereign immunity, and sovereign immunity barred plaintiff's RICO and constitutional claims.
Absent evidence of inability to pay or a request to waive the bond requirement, a court could dismiss a case, if plaintiff failed to pay a bond.
Allegations that a prisoner suffered from serious mental health conditions such as post traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, and that defendant mental health counselor was deliberately indifferent, refused to order medication and instructed plaintiff to "deal with it like a man," could be sufficient to allege a violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Connecticut General Statutes §45a-234(19) absolved the estate fiduciary of responsibility for issues that arose concerning the estate professional that the fiduciary selected and hired, if the fiduciary used due care.
The use of the word "a" in Connecticut General Statutes §52-225a meant that if there were "any" right of subrogation, a collateral source reduction was not allowed.
If election officials received training on operating alternative voting system machines (used by individuals with disabilities) and were not able to operate them on Election Day, the machines were not considered "operable."
The State Elections Enforcement Commission could fine a treasurer who allegedly failed to file finance reports.
Registrars of voters who initially informed a voter he could not change his affiliation, and later that day allowed the voter to change from unaffiliated to Democratic, did not violate state election laws.
The Freedom of Information Commission could not order the release of records that were not available because they were not created.
Freedom of Information Commission
Allegations that an online retailer and an online discount savings Web site promised a $20 coupon that they never provided, and that a consumer was the victim of a coordinated bait and switch, were sufficient to allege an unfair trade practice.
The Mashantucket Administrative Procedure Act did not prove jurisdiction over a firefighter's appeal of disciplinary action.
A court could disqualify defendant's attorney, because defendant's attorney also represented a relative who was a significant witness.
A court rejected an electrical lineman's claim that because work performed during storms was dangerous, compensation for that work should be exempt from alimony and child support claims.
A defendant could comply with conditions of accelerated rehabilitation and probation, even if he did not pay restitution.
Allegations that police failed to keep and to preserve a weapon might not be sufficient to establish a due-process violation.
A court could find that CUTPA allegations were "easily differentiated" from other allegations and that successful plaintiffs were only entitled to attorney fees on the CUTPA count.
A grand jury statement could be admitted to prove that the statement was false, without violating the hearsay rule.
An unpaid worker in Connecticut could be entitled to liquidated damages under the federal Fair Labor Standards Act, plus punitive damages under the Connecticut Minimum Wage Act.
To prove a prima facie case, plaintiff was required to prove that she belonged to a protected group, that she was qualified and that she was discharged under circumstances that led to an inference of discrimination on the basis of age.
Defendant police officer had more than arguable probable cause to arrest plaintiff, after he allegedly sent threatening e-mails to his former wife, in violation of a protective order.
Connecticut General Statutes §13b-36(a) did not authorize the commissioner of the Department of Transportation to exercise the power of eminent domain over certificates of public convenience.
Public Act 11-71, which reduced the penalty for possession of less than one-half ounce of marijuana to a fine of $150 to $500, effectively decriminalized the possession of small amounts of marijuana.
The purpose of the "final judgment" rule was to discourage piecemeal appeals, and exceptions to the rule were intended to be narrow.
A municipality could possess just cause to discharge a worker who allegedly falsified records 22 times.
Kuenhel, Podurgiel and Sullivan
A city could discharge a worker who allegedly was insubordinate and was unable to explain his lack of productivity.
Toomey, Malse and Celentano
A city could suspend a police officer who allegedly violated department rules, engaged in a prohibited off-duty arrest, engaged in conduct unbecoming an officer and was not truthful.
Kuehnel, Ryan and Sullivan
It would be unfair to a defendant, to force the defendant to conduct two depositions of a plaintiff's expert witness (one for discovery and one for trial) on the same day.
Just compensation for property taken by eminent domain could be computed as the market value of the property when put to its highest and best use at the time of the taking.
A written offer to purchase property was not enforceable, absent a contract that both parties signed.
To prevail in a slip-and fall case, plaintiff was required to prove a defect, notice of the defect and failure to exercise due care.
A court could disbar an attorney who allegedly was caught embezzling funds from a client.
A court could find that the requested attorney fees were "unreasonably high" for a collection action.
Connecticut's appellate courts place the burden on claimants to prove that a tortfeasor was uninsured.
A municipality qualified as an "owner" of land, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §52-557g of the recreational- use statute.
The Connecticut District Court's resolution of material issues in board of education defendants' favor collaterally estopped plaintiff employee from bringing a claim in state court that defendant violated Connecticut General Statutes §31-51q.
Benefits conferred on a manager who won a promotion to director, such as salary increase, stock options, bonus severance package and progressive discipline, were insufficient to change the manager's status as an at-will employee.
The identities of clients and their addresses, phone numbers and billing information were not protected by the attorney-client privilege.
Material prepared by an attorney or the attorney's representative in contemplation of litigation was subject to discovery, if the party who requested discovery established a substantial need of the material and was unable, without undue hardship, to obtain the substantial equivalent.
A court could award economic damages for medical expenses and loss of wages and non-economic damages, for pain and suffering, for a punch in the face.
A court could find that counsel's arguments about methods that defendant could have used to warn pedestrians was not improper and, even if improper, did not prejudice defendant.
An employer who proved that an employee engaged in civil theft could be entitled to treble damages, pursuant to Connecticut General Statutes §52-564.
A controversy concerning plaintiff's use of a contested trademark did not appear to be "immediate or real" at the time that plaintiff filed its request for a declaratory judgment, because plaintiff's Web site was not yet functional.
A defendant could be "in custody" during an interrogation, if a reasonable individual would not have believed that he was free to leave.
Data on overtime worked by nine drivers did not provide sufficient grounds to draw conclusions about overtime worked by 38 other drivers in an FLSA collective action.
Allegations that plaintiff inmate was diagnosed with a seizure disorder, and that defendant prison officials refused to give him a bottom bunk, were sufficient to state a claim for deliberate indifference to a serious medical condition.
A plaintiff who sued a police officer for excessive use of force carried the burden to prove by a preponderance of the evidence his version of the facts.
Fences, merestones (the markers of a boundary), trees and shrubs, in the absence of a road or track that ran between them, did not meet the requirements for an exception in Connecticut General Statutes §47-33h of the Marketable Title Act.
The fact that the trial court ruled in favor of the father when it awarded the father sole custody was insufficient to establish personal bias against the mother.
To prevail on a negligence claim, plaintiff was required to prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that defendants failed to maintain safe conditions at a hospital construction work site and were negligent.
Issues in petitioner's habeas petition, in which he alleged that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance, because he did not place the state's first plea offer on the record, were not debatable among jurists of reason and could not be resolved in a different manner.
The trial court's reliance on an earlier termination of respondent mother's parental rights when the mother was 17 years old did not violate the mother's due-process rights.
An employer could commit an unlawful refusal to bargain and a prohibited practice, if the employer unilaterally transferred bargaining unit work to non-bargaining unit employees.
Battey, Low and Bird
To prevail on a claim of race discrimination, a worker was required to allege that defendants treated him differently because of his race.
To prevail on a selective enforcement claim, in violation of the Equal Protection Clause in the 14th Amendment, plaintiff was required to prove an extremely high degree of similarity between himself and alleged comparators.
The continuing violation doctrine did not apply, to extend the statute of limitations.