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.

Law Library Research Guides: Civil Procedure

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=378

The Judicial Branch law librarians author and update a number of research guides on various legal topics (family law, juvenile law, property law) in addition to the following selections on civil procedure and motion practice:

You can find more civil matters research guides along with our complete collection on our Research Guides webpage.

Insurance Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=377

SC19585 - Gold v. Rowland ("This certified class action, which arises from a dispute over the proceeds of the 2001 demutualization of the defendant Anthem Insurance Companies, Inc. (Anthem Insurance), comes before this court for the second time. The plaintiffs are a class of state employees and retirees who, at the time of the demutualization, were enrolled in an Anthem Insurance group health care insurance plan. They contend that their participation in that plan entitled them to membership in Anthem Insurance and a share of the demutualization proceeds, and that Anthem Insurance and the other insurance company defendants; see part I E of this opinion; breached their contractual obligations by not paying the plaintiffs for their membership interests and instead distributing their share of the proceeds to the defendant state of Connecticut. The first time we considered this case, we concluded that all of the plaintiffs’ claims against the named defendant, John Rowland, the former governor of Connecticut, and the state were barred by the doctrine of sovereign immunity or otherwise should have been dismissed. See Gold v. Rowland, 296 Conn. 186, 205, 209–11, 994 A.2d 106 (2010). Following our decision and a subsequent trial to the court of the plaintiffs’ breach of contract claims against the remaining defendants, the trial court, Bright, J., rendered judgment for those defendants. On appeal, the plaintiffs contend that the trial court incorrectly concluded that the relevant contract provisions were ambiguous and improperly consulted extrinsic evidence to determine their meaning. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.")

Law Library Hours Update: March 30th - April 7th

   by Dowd, Jeffrey

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=376

Thursday, March 30th

  • Rockville Law Library will be closed.
  • Waterbury Law Library will be open from 9:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

Friday, March 31st

  • New London Law Library will be open from 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
  • Rockville Law Library will be closed.
  • Waterbury Law Library will be open from 9:30 a.m. - 4:30 p.m.

See our regularly scheduled hours.

Criminal Law Supreme Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=375

SC19735 - State v. Edwards (Home invasion; robbery first degree; assault of elderly person third degree; larceny second degree; "The defendant, Eugene Edwards, Jr., appeals from the judgment of the trial court convicting him of home invasion in violation of General Statutes § 53a-100aa (a) (2), robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-134 (a) (2), larceny in the second degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-123 (a) (3), and assault of an elderly person in the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-61a (a) (1) arising out of an incident in Wethersfield. On appeal to this court, the defendant asserts that: (1) the trial court improperly denied his motion to suppress certain statements that he had made to police; (2) the trial court abused its discretion when it allowed a police officer to present nonexpert testimony regarding cell phone records and maps; and (3) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. We agree with the defendant that the trial court improperly allowed the police officer to present certain testimony regarding the cell phone records and maps, but find such error was harmless. We disagree with the defendant's other claims and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

Juvenile Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=373

AC39594 - In re Savannah Y. (Termination of parental rights; "The respondent mother, Ashley R., appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered in favor of the petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Families, terminating her parental rights with respect to her minor child, Savannah Y. On appeal, the respondent claims that the court improperly determined that (1) the Department of Children and Families (department) made reasonable reunification efforts, (2) she had failed to achieve a sufficient degree of personal rehabilitation to encourage a belief that she could assume a responsible position in Savannah's life within a reasonable period of time, (3) there was no ongoing parent-child relationship, and (4) termination of her parental rights was in the best interest of the child. We affirm the judgment of the court.")

Did You Know? The OLR Map Room

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=371

The Office of Legislative Research (OLR) provides invaluable tools for the legal and legislative researcher in Connecticut. In addition to their research Reports, Backgrounders, and other services they provide to the Connecticut legislature, they also have a fascinating and useful legislative committee Map Room that has a wealth of information on committee areas of interest presented in a uniquely visual and memorable way!

Law Library Hours Update: March 28th - March 31st

   by Dowd, Jeffrey

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=370

Tuesday, March 28th

  • Middletown Law Library will close at 4:30 p.m.
  • New London Law Library will close at 3:30 p.m.

Wednesday, March 29th

  • Hartford Law Library will close at 4:45 p.m.
  • Rockville Law Library will close at 3:30 p.m.

Thursday, March 30th

  • Rockville Law Library will be closed.

Friday, March 31st

  • New London Law Library will be open from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

See our regularly scheduled hours.

Employment Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=368

AC37529 - Jones v. Dept. of Children & Families ("In this employment discrimination case, the plaintiff, Michael Jones, appeals from the trial court’s judgment in favor of the defendant, the Department of Children and Families. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court improperly concluded that he did not meet his burden of persuasion with respect to his allegations that the defendant subjected him to unlawful discrimination on the basis of his sexual orientation. See Connecticut Fair Employment Practices Act (act), General Statutes § 46a-51 et seq. Specifically, the plaintiff contends that the court: (1) improperly imposed on the plaintiff the burden of proving the falsity of the reason given by the defendant for the termination, (2) improperly applied an adverse inference against the plaintiff (3) failed to correctly apply the 'cat’s paw' theory of liability, (4) erred by failing to make factual findings regarding discriminatory animus held by the plaintiff’s supervisors, and (5) improperly concluded that the plaintiff’s retaliation claim relied on timing alone. We disagree with the plaintiff’s assertions and affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

Family Law Appellate Court Opinion

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=367

AC38275 - Jeanette-Blethen v. Jeanette-Blethen ("The plaintiff, Aimee L. Jeanette-Blethen, appeals from the postjudgment orders of the trial court, Carbonneau, J., granting the motion of the defendant, Jeffrey M. Jeanette-Blethen, to modify custody with respect to the primary residence of the parties’ minor children, and granting the motion of Eileen Martin, the maternal grandmother, to intervene pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-593 upon finding that a parent-like relationship existed between her and the minor children. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court’s factual findings are clearly erroneous and that the court abused its discretion in modifying the custody order that was entered at the time of the dissolution judgment. 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=366

AC38493 - Just Restaurants v. Thames Restaurant Group, LLC ("The defendant, Thames Restaurant Group, LLC, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendered in favor of the substitute plaintiff, John Russo, doing business as Just Restaurants Business Brokers. The dispositive issue is whether the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over this action. We agree with the parties that the action was commenced by the named plaintiff, Just Restaurants, using a fictitious or assumed business name, or a trade name. Under our law, that name did not create or encompass a person or entity with a legal existence, and, therefore, the named plaintiff had had no capacity to bring an action. The court thus lacked subject matter jurisdiction over its complaint and the action. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case with direction to dismiss the action.")

Tort Law Appellate Court Opinions

   by Mazur, Catherine

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=364

AC38155 - Snell v. Norwalk Yellow Cab, Inc. (Negligence; "In Barry v. Quality Steel Products Inc., 263 Conn. 424, 436–39, 820 A.2d 258 (2003), our Supreme Court abolished the use of the superseding cause doctrine in cases in which the conduct of the intervening actor was merely negligent. This appeal requires us to consider the vitality of the doctrine in circumstances in which the conduct of the intervening actor is criminally reckless. We conclude that the doctrine is alive and well in such cases.")

AC38173 - Stamatopoulos v. ECS North America, LLC (Conversion; "The plaintiff, Evangelos Stamatopoulos, appeals from the judgment of the trial court, rendered after a bench trial, in favor of the defendant, ECS North America, LLC, on both of the plaintiff's claims for conversion and replevin. He claims that the court erroneously concluded that the defendant was a good faith purchaser of the subject property for value under the Uniform Commercial Code, General Statutes § 42a-1-101 et seq. We conclude, however, that this claim is moot because there is an independent, unchallenged ground upon which we may affirm the court's judgment for the defendant on both counts of the complaint. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.")

Habeas Appellate Court Opinion

   by Townsend, Karen

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=365

AC37129 - Thompson v. Commissioner of Correction (Habeas; "On appeal, the petitioner claims that the habeas court abused its discretion in denying him certification to appeal and improperly concluded that his trial counsel did not provide ineffective assistance. We dismiss the appeal… The principal issue raised by the petitioner in this appeal is that the court erred in not finding counsel ineffective for an alleged failure to present a closing argument that the restraint or abduction of the victim was not a kidnapping, but merely incidental to his other crimes, and to properly file a motion for a judgment of acquittal as to the charge of kidnapping.")

Criminal Law Appellate Court Opinions

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=363

AC37613 - State v. Killiebrew (Arson; "The defendant, Issiah Killiebrew, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of one count of arson in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-111 (a) (1). The court further found the defendant guilty of violating his probation. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court erred (1) by not canvassing him concerning his right to counsel and right to self-representation after he clearly and unequivocally invoked his right to self-representation and (2) if his invocation of his right to self-representation was not clear and unequivocal, by not canvassing him concerning whether he wanted to invoke his right to self-representation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

AC37649 - State v. Cervantes (Sexual assault in first degree; home invasion; custodial interrogation; "Following a conditional plea of nolo contendere, entered pursuant to General Statutes § 54-94a, the defendant, Marcelo Cervantes, appeals from the judgment of conviction of sexual assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a) (1) and home invasion in violation of General Statutes § 53a-100aa (a) (1). The defendant entered his conditional plea following the court's denial of his motion to suppress certain oral statements that he made to members of the Hamden Police Department. He made the statements during, what he claims to have been, a custodial interrogation inside of a police vehicle, without the benefit of having been advised of his constitutional rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478–79, 86 S. Ct. 1602, 16 L. Ed. 2d 694 (1966). The state argued, and the trial court agreed, that the challenged statements should not be suppressed because, although the defendant, concededly, was interrogated in the vehicle by the police before he made such statements, he was not in custody at that time for purposes of Miranda. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court erred in denying his motion to suppress. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

AC38309 - State v. Bonds (Felony murder; robbery in first degree; conspiracy to commit robbery in second degree; "The defendant, Darryl Bonds, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial, of one count of felony murder in violation of General Statutes § 53a-54c, one count of robbery in the first degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-134 (a) (2), and one count of conspiracy to commit robbery in the second degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-48 (a) and 53a-135. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court improperly (1) admitted two separate out-of-court statements under our hearsay exception for statements against penal interest, (2) admitted an out-of-court statement made by the defendant that was not properly authenticated, and (3) denied the defendant's request to instruct the jury on an affirmative defense to felony murder. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.")

Law by Subject: Pardons and Paroles

   by Roy, Christopher

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=362

Our Law by Subject web pages bring together links to statutes, rules, regulations, research reports, and other online materials. Our Law about Pardons and Paroles page has been updated to include a recent Office of Legislative Research report (Inmate Sentence Reduction Methods), Department of Correction Administrative Directives, and recent regulations.

Administrative Appeal Supreme Court Opinion

   by Booth, George

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=361

SC19622 - Amaral Brothers, Inc. v. Dept. of Labor (Administrative appeal; "General Statutes § 31-60 (b) carves out certain exceptions to Connecticut's minimum wage laws. Among other things, § 31-60 (b) directs the Labor Commissioner, acting through the defendant, the Department of Labor, to adopt regulations that recognize that employers may include gratuities as part of the minimum fair wage for employees in the restaurant and hotel industries who customarily and regularly receive gratuities (tip credit). The primary question raised by this appeal is whether the department's regulations, which limit the tip credit to bartenders and traditional waitstaff and do not allow employers to count gratuities toward the minimum wage for other employees such as restaurant delivery drivers, conflict with the enabling statute. Because we conclude that the regulations are not incompatible with § 31-60 (b), we affirm the judgment of the trial court dismissing the appeal of the plaintiff, Amaral Brothers, Inc., from the commissioner's declaratory ruling that the plaintiff's drivers are not subject to a tip credit.")

Law Library Hours Update: March 27th - March 31st

   by Dowd, Jeffrey

 https://jud.ct.gov/lawlib/LawLibNews/Posts/Post.aspx?Id=359

Monday, March 27th

  • Rockville Law Library will close at 3:30 p.m.

Tuesday, March 28th

  • Middletown Law Library will close at 3:45 p.m.
  • New London Law Library will close at 3:30 p.m.

Wednesday, March 29th

  • Rockville Law Library will close at 3:30 p.m.

Friday, March 31st

  • New London Law Library will be open from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.

See our regularly scheduled hours.


1 2 3 Next Last