The mission of the Connecticut Judicial Branch is to serve the interests of justice and the public by resolving matters brought before it in a fair, timely, efficient and open manner.


Connecticut Law Journal - March 24, 2020

   by Dowd, Jeffrey

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3920

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXI, No. 39, for March 24, 2020 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 335: Connecticut Reports (Pages 29 - 53)
  • Volume 335: Orders (Pages 903 - 907)
  • Volume 335: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 196: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 543 - 646)
  • Volume 196: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 906 - 906)
  • Volume 196: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices
  • Supreme Court Pending Cases


Criminal Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3919

SC20132 - State v. Sawyer ("The defendant, Thomas William Sawyer, was convicted on a conditional plea of nolo contendere; see General Statutes § 54-94a; of possession of child pornography in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-196e. The defendant entered his plea following the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress hundreds of photographs and a smaller number of videos of suspected child pornography that the police recovered from computer equipment and related media storage seized from the defendant's residence pursuant to a search warrant. The defendant appealed from his conviction to the Appellate Court, and the case was transferred to this court. On appeal, the defendant argues that the search warrant was not supported by probable cause because the issuing judge could not have reasonably inferred from descriptions in the search warrant affidavit of two photographs of nude children that the photographs were lascivious. This case requires us to decide whether the totality of the circumstances described in the affidavit and the reasonable inferences drawn therefrom support a finding of probable cause to believe that a search of the defendant's residence would uncover evidence of possession of child pornography. Because we conclude that the affidavit did support this finding, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.")


Connecticut Law Journal - March 17, 2020

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3918

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXI, No. 38, for March 17, 2020 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 335: Connecticut Reports (Pages 1 - 28)
  • Volume 335: Orders (Pages 901 - 903)
  • Volume 335: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 196: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 430 - 543)
  • Volume 196: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 905 - 906)
  • Volume 196: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices
  • Notices of Connecticut State Agencies


Judicial Branch Law Libraries Closed Until Further Notice

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3917

The Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries will be closed until further notice. Please see this notice (reproduced below), which lists the services that will continue to be available.

Effective immediately, the Connecticut Judicial Branch, Law Library Services’ courthouse law libraries will be closed until further notice.

Law Librarians will continue to provide services remotely through those programs currently managed and maintained by the librarians: JB Feedback "Ask Us A Question", "Ask a Librarian", and "Live Chat". Telephone and email assistance and response will also be available by contacting a law library. The Law Librarians will perform administrative duties and tasks, as usual, and staff will continue to update and enhance valuable online resources offered to the public via the Law Library Services’ web page.

We look forward to continuing to serve the needs of our patrons.


Habeas Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Agati, Taryn

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3916

SC20221 - Langston v. Commissioner of Correction ("In December, 2014, the petitioner, Richard Langston, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, later amended in 2016, which was the most recent in a series of state and federal habeas corpus petitions challenging his 1999 conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of numerous offenses, including robbery in the first degree. Following a hearing on a request for an order to show cause filed by the respondent, the Commissioner of Correction, the habeas court rendered judgment dismissing that petition on the ground that the petitioner had failed to show good cause for his untimely filing pursuant to General Statutes § 52-470 (d) and granted the petitioner certification to appeal to the Appellate Court. The petitioner now appeals, upon our grant of his petition for certification, from the judgment of the Appellate Court affirming the judgment of the habeas court dismissing the petition. Langston v. Commissioner of Correction, 185 Conn. App. 528, 197 A.3d 1034 (2018). On appeal, the petitioner claims that the Appellate Court incorrectly concluded that the habeas court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing the petition because, in filing it late, he had relied on the advice of an attorney who had represented him in connection with an earlier habeas petition filed in 2012 and who had advised him to withdraw that validly filed petition while a motion to dismiss was pending and to file the present one in its place, even though it would be subject to a statutory presumption of delay.")


Insurance Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3915

AC42082 - RCN Capital, LLC v. Chicago Title Ins. Co. ("In this breach of contract action, the plaintiff, RCN Capital, LLC, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding it $108,000 in damages. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly determined the amount of damages. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")


Contract Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3914

AC41931 - Professional Electrical Contractors of Connecticut, Inc. v. Stamford Hospital ("The plaintiff, Professional Electrical Contractors of Connecticut, Inc., appeals from the summary judgment rendered by the trial court in favor of the defendants Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland (Fidelity) and Skanska USA Building, Inc. (Skanska). On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court erred in rendering summary judgment on counts two and three of its complaint because there were genuine issues of material facts and neither defendant was entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Specifically, the plaintiff claims that (1) Skanska failed to prove that there existed no issues of material fact on the plaintiff's equitable claim of quantum meruit or unjust enrichment, and (2) neither defendant established that it was entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the plaintiff's bond claim because the claim is viable pursuant to General Statutes §§ 49-33 and 49-36. We agree with the plaintiff on both claims. Accordingly, we reverse in part and affirm in part the judgment of the trial court.")


Employment Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3913

AC41981 - Board of Education v. Waterbury Teachers Assn., CEA-NEA ("The defendant, the Waterbury Teachers Association, CEA-NEA (union), appeals from the judgment of the trial court vacating an arbitration award in favor of the plaintiff, the Board of Education of the City of Waterbury (board). On appeal, the union claims that the trial court erred in concluding that (1) the arbitrator so imperfectly executed his powers that a mutual, final, and definite award on the subject matter submitted was not made, and (2) the arbitration award violates public policy. We agree with both of the union's claims and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the trial court.")


Criminal Law Appellate Court Opinions

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3911

AC42267 - State v. Rosa (Murder; assault in first degree; criminal possession of firearm; unpreserved claim that state suppressed DNA evidence that was material to defense in violation of Brady v. Maryland (373 U.S. 83) and did not disclose it until after jury returned verdict; "The defendant, Tyrone Rosa, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered following a jury trial, of one count of murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54a, one count of assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-59 (a) (5) and one count of criminal possession of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217 (a) (1). The defendant claims that the state suppressed evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 87, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963). Specifically, the defendant asserts that, either before his trial began or while the trial was ongoing, the state, via its agent, the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection's division of scientific services (division), acquired evidence that the Combined DNA Index System (CODIS) reported that a DNA profile that was developed from the swabbing of a discarded sweatshirt found in the vicinity of the crime scene matched (CODIS match) a DNA sample collected from a convicted felon, Javier Otero. He asserts that this evidence, which was favorable to him and material for purposes of Brady, was not disclosed to the defense until after the jury had returned a guilty verdict. He asserts that this evidence would have bolstered his sole theory of defense that an unknown gunman committed the crimes and also would have discredited the state's key witness. We affirm the judgment of the trial court because we conclude that the defendant has failed to prove that the CODIS match was material to his defense.")

AC41544 - State v. Bradbury (Criminal possession of firearm; carrying pistol without permit; assault in first degree; criminal attempt to commit robbery in first degree; "The defendant, Wayne S. Bradbury, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered following the jury's guilty verdict, of criminal possession of a firearm in violation of General Statutes § 53a-217 (a) (1) and carrying a pistol without a permit in violation of General Statutes § 29-35 (a). The defendant claims that, in light of the jury's not guilty finding on the remaining charges, there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")


Tort Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Penn, Michele

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3910

SC20285 - Garcia v. Cohen ("In this negligence action, a jury returned a verdict finding the defendants, Robert Cohen and Diane Cohen, not liable as landlords for injuries the plaintiff, Ussbasy Garcia, suffered when she slipped and fell on the staircase outside of her apartment building. The plaintiff appealed to the Appellate Court, claiming that the trial court improperly rejected her request to charge and to instruct the jury that, the defendants, as the possessors of real property, had a nondelegable duty to maintain the premises. Garcia v. Cohen, 188 Conn. App. 380, 381–82, 204 A.3d 1245 (2019). The Appellate Court declined to review the plaintiff's claim, concluding that the general verdict rule applied because the plaintiff had failed to object when the trial court denied her request to submit her proposed interrogatories to the jury. Id., 386. Additionally, the Appellate Court concluded that the plaintiff should have made, but failed to do so, an independent claim of error on appeal on the basis of the trial court's denial of her request to submit her proposed interrogatories to the jury. Id., 386–87.

We disagree with the Appellate Court's conclusion that the general verdict rule bars appellate review of the plaintiff's jury instruction claim. The general verdict rule does not apply in the present case because the plaintiff had requested that the trial court submit her properly framed interrogatories to the jury and had objected when it denied her request. She properly framed her interrogatories by submitting questions addressing her claim of negligence and the defendants' denial of negligence and special defense of contributory negligence. The claims of negligence and contributory negligence are so intertwined with the plaintiff's nondelegable duty jury charge claim on appeal that the general verdict rule does not bar review. Additionally, the plaintiff was not required on appeal to assert an independent claim of error on the basis of the trial court's rejection of her request to submit the interrogatories to the jury. Rather, the plaintiff's submission of interrogatories and her objection upon the court's refusal to submit them to the jury is a defense to application of the general verdict rule, not an independent claim of error. For these reasons, we reverse the judgment of the Appellate Court and remand the case to that court to undertake a review of the trial court's denial of the plaintiff's request for a jury instruction on the nondelegable duty doctrine.")



Declaratory Judgment Law Appellate Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3912

AC42288 - Kaminski v. Semple ("The self-represented plaintiff, John S. Kaminski, appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting the defendants' motion to dismiss on the grounds that the defendants, who are state employees, are entitled to sovereign immunity or statutory immunity pursuant to General Statutes § 4-165, and that the plaintiff lacked standing to assert a claim that was based on the defendants' alleged failure to conduct a criminal investigation into the abuse he claimed had been inflicted on him by a correction officer. The plaintiff contends that, because all of the defendants were sued in their individual capacities, the court improperly concluded that the defendants were entitled to sovereign immunity and statutory immunity. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in part and dismiss the appeal in part as moot.")


New Office of Legislative Research Reports

   by Zigadto, Janet

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3908

The Office of Legislative Research has recently published the following reports:

Connecticut Penal Code - Updated and Revised- 2020-R-0091 - This report lists all crimes in the Connecticut Penal Code (Title 53a of the General Statutes) and their penalties. It updates OLR Report 2018-R-0073.

Municipal Landlord Registries- 2020-R-0022 - Summarizes the requirements of the landlord identification registry that municipalities may establish, including the newly expanded filing requirements for project-based housing providers (PBHPs).

State Liens on Real Property of Public Assistance Recipients- 2020-R-0051 - Provides an overview of the Connecticut law which authorizes the state to place liens on real property to recover public assistance. Identifies other states currently allowing this practice, as well as any recently proposed legislation to roll back or mitigate the impact of such liens.

Patient Medical Records Access- 2020-R-0069 - This report provides an overview of state laws on patient access to medical records from individual health care providers in a question and answer format.

Race Requirements on Marriage Licenses- 2020-R-0061 - Provides information on (1) Connecticut’s law that requires individuals to disclose their race on marriage license application forms and (2) a recent court challenge to a similar law in Virginia.


Connecticut Law Journal - March 10, 2020

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=3906

The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXI, No. 37, for March 10, 2020 is now available.

Contained in the issue is the following:

  • Table of Contents
  • Volume 334: Connecticut Reports (Pages 823 - 878)
  • Volume 334: Orders (Pages 926 - 929)
  • Volume 334: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
  • Volume 196: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 316 - 429)
  • Volume 196: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 902 - 905)
  • Volume 196: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
  • Miscellaneous Notices
  • Notices of Connecticut State Agencies