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.
AC47604 – Alston v. Commissioner of Correction (“Following the denial of his petition for certification to
appeal, the petitioner, Ira Alston, appeals from the judgment of the habeas
court dismissing, pursuant to Practice Book § 23-29, his second amended
petition for a writ of habeas corpus (operative habeas petition), in which he
alleged, in count five, that the habeas court in a prior habeas matter
improperly denied his application for the appointment of appellate counsel. On
appeal, the petitioner claims that the second habeas court (1) abused its
discretion in denying his petition for certification to appeal and (2)
improperly dismissed count five of the operative habeas petition pursuant to §
23-29 (2) for failure to state a claim on which habeas relief could be granted.
We conclude that the court did not abuse its discretion in denying the petition
for certification to appeal and, accordingly, dismiss the appeal.”)
AC47426 – Haughey v. Commissioner of Correction (Denial of petition for certification to appeal and denial of petition for a writ of habeas corpus; “He claims that the habeas court (1) abused its discretion when it denied his petition for certification to appeal, and (2) erred by rendering judgment on the petition before hearing and resolving the petitioner’s motion to dismiss counsel and to appoint new counsel (motion to dismiss counsel). We conclude that the habeas court abused its discretion when it denied the petition for certification to appeal and remand this case to the habeas court for the purpose of conducting a hearing on the merits of the petitioner’s motion to dismiss counsel.”)
AC47512 – Raymond v. Briere (“In this custody dispute, the self-represented plaintiff,
Amanda L. Raymond, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding the
defendant, Justin K. Briere, primary physical custody of their minor child, M.
On appeal, the plaintiff claims that the court (1) erred by admitting evidence
of the plaintiff’s conduct related to her efforts to research and report
alleged criminal activity to law enforcement, (2) violated her right to a fair
trial by exhibiting bias in favor of the defendant, and (3) erred by ordering
her to undergo a psychological evaluation and to comply with any treatment
recommendations made in connection with such evaluation. We agree with the
plaintiff that the court erred in ordering her to undergo a psychological
evaluation but disagree with the plaintiff’s remaining claims. We therefore
reverse the judgment of the trial court in part and vacate the order requiring
her to undergo a psychological evaluation. We affirm the judgment in all other
respects.”)
AC48427 – Richardson v. Semple ("The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Connecticut (ACLU) appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying its motion to intervene in this action for the limited purpose of litigating the issue of whether a certain video recording filed as an exhibit to a memorandum of law in support of a motion for summary judgment filed by the defendants, various employees of the Department of Correction (DOC), should be sealed pursuant to Practice Book § 11-20A. We conclude that the ACLU does not have a colorable claim of intervention as of right and, therefore, is not appealing from a final judgment. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.")
Thursday, December 4
- New London Law Library is closed.
- New Britain Law Library closes at 4:45 p.m.
Friday, December 5
- Danbury Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library closes at 4:30 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 4:30 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library closes at 3:00 p.m.
Monday, December 8
- New Britain Law Library closes at 2:15 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 4:45 p.m.
Tuesday, December 9
- New Britain Law Library closes from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 3:30 p.m.
Wednesday, December 10
- Danbury Law Library closes from 1:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m.
Thursday, December 11
- Middletown Law Library closes at 3:30 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library closes at 3:45 p.m.
Friday, December 12
- New Britain Law Library closes at 3:00 p.m.
SC21082 - Duso v. Groton, “The question we must
decide in the present appeal is whether the plaintiffs, retired police officers
of the town of Groton, are entitled under a 2008 pension agreement to receive
health savings account (HSA) contributions from the town, like the town now pays
to its active police officers under a successive collective bargaining
agreement, which incorporates the same 2008 pension agreement. The Appellate
Court concluded that the plaintiffs are, holding that the provision of the 2008
pension agreement entitling retirees to the ‘‘nature and scope of coverages,
including but not limited to deductibles . . . in effect for active [p]olice
[o]fficers’’ extended to the HSA contributions that are paid to active police
officers. See Duso v. Groton, 228 Conn. App. 390, 423–24, 325 A.3d 295 (2024).
We granted the town’s petition for certification to appeal and now reverse the
judgment of the Appellate Court.”
The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVII, No. 23, for December 2, 2025 is now available.
- Table of Contents
- Volume 353: Orders (Pages 926 - 929)
- Volume 353: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
- Volume 236: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 527 - 567)
- Volume 236: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 905 - 907)
- Volume 236: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
- Miscellaneous Notices
- Notices of Connecticut State Agencies
AC47443 - Ashe v. Yale University (“The
plaintiffs, Victor H. Ashe and Donald G. Glascoff, Jr., alumni of the
defendant, Yale University, appeal from the judgment of the trial court denying
their motion for summary judgment, granting the defendant’s motion for summary
judgment, and dismissing their claim alleging ultra vires acts in violation of
the Connecticut Revised Nonstock Corporation Act (act), General Statutes §
33-1000 et seq. On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the court improperly (1)
rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendant because the court
incorrectly determined that the plaintiffs lack standing on the basis that they
are not third-party beneficiaries of the defendant’s charter, and (2) granted
the defendant’s motion to dismiss their ultra vires claim because the court
improperly determined that alumni are not members within the meaning of the act
and, thus, the plaintiffs lacked standing to bring the claim. We affirm the
judgment of the trial court.”)
Friday, November 28
- Bridgeport Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Danbury Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library is closed.
- New Britain Law Library is closed.
- New Haven Law Library is closed.
- New London Law Library is closed.
- Torrington Law Library is closed.
Monday, December 1
- Waterbury Law Library closes at 3:30 p.m.
Tuesday, December 2
- Danbury Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Hartford Law Library closes at 4:15 p.m.
Thursday, December 4
- New London Law Library is closed.
- New Britain Law Library closes at 4:45 p.m.
Friday, December 5
- Putnam Law Library closes at 4:30 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library closes at 3:00 p.m.
AC46815 - Ramos v. State ("The self-represented petitioner, Jose
Ramos, appeals from the judgment of the trial court claiming that it improperly denied his petition for a new
trial. The respondent, the state of Connecticut, argues,
inter alia, that the appeal should be dismissed due to
the petitioner’s failure to comply with the certification
requirement of General Statutes § 54-95 (a). We agree
with the respondent and, accordingly, dismiss the
appeal.")
The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVII, No. 22, for November 25, 2025 is now available.
- Table of Contents
- Volume 353: Orders (Pages 922 - 926)
- Volume 353: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
- Volume 236: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 428 - 527)
- Volume 236: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
- Notices of Connecticut State Agencies
AC48494 - State v. Antwon B. ("The defendant, Antwon B., appeals from
the judgment of conviction, rendered after a jury trial,
of attempt to commit assault in the first degree in violation of General Statutes §§ 53a-49 and 53a-59 (a) (1) and larceny in the third degree in violation of General
Statutes (Rev. to 2019) § 53a-124 (a) (1). On appeal,
the defendant claims that (1) there was insufficient
evidence to prove that he had committed the crimes of
attempt to commit assault in the first degree and larceny
in the third degree, and (2) prosecutorial impropriety
deprived him of a fair trial. We affirm the judgment of
conviction.")
AC47644 - Maner v. Commissioner of Correction (“He claims on appeal, inter alia, that (1) the court
improperly denied his freestanding constitutional claim, which asserted that
the police had illegally obtained records containing his historical cell site
location information (CSLI) in violation of his rights under the fourth
amendment to the United States constitution, (2) the 2016 amendments to General
Statutes § 54-47aa contained in Public Acts 2016, No. 16-148, § 1 (2016
amendments), which require the police to obtain a warrant based on probable
cause before obtaining historical CSLI, should apply retroactively in the
present case, (3) certain CSLI obtained by the police did not comply with
General Statutes (Rev. to 2007) § 54-47aa, and (4) the court incorrectly
concluded that any error in the admission of the petitioner’s CSLI was harmless
beyond a reasonable doubt. For the reasons that follow, we reject the
petitioner’s claims and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the court.”)
AC47404 - Howard v. Commissioner of Correction (Alford doctrine; one count of murder; violation of
probation; “The petitioner claims that the habeas court improperly (1) denied
her claim that she was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel and (2)
dismissed her claim that her guilty plea was involuntary. We disagree and,
accordingly, affirm the judgment of the habeas court.”)
Friday, November 21
- Bridgeport Law Library closes at 4:00 p.m.
- Danbury Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Hartford Law Library closes at 1:15 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library closes at 1:30 p.m.
- New Britain Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Stamford Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Torrington Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library is closed.
Monday, November 24
- Danbury Law Library closes at 3:30 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes from 12:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Tuesday, November 25
- Danbury Law Library closes at 4:15 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library opens at 10:00 a.m.
- New Britain Law Library closes at 4:15 p.m.
- Torrington Law Library closes at 3:30 p.m.
Wednesday, November 26
- New London Law Library is closed.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 1:30 p.m.
- Hartford Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
Thursday, November 27
- All Connecticut Judicial Branch Law Libraries are closed for the holiday.
Friday, November 28
- Bridgeport Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Danbury Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library is closed.
- New Britain Law Library is closed.
- New Haven Law Library is closed.
- New London Law Library is closed.
- Torrington Law Library is closed.
The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVII, No. 21, for November 18, 2025 is now available.
- Table of Contents
- Volume 353: Orders (Pages 921 - 922)
- Volume 353: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
- Volume 236: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 357 - 427)
- Volume 236: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 905 - 905)
- Volume 236: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
- Miscellaneous Notices
- Supreme Court Pending Cases
AC47165, AC46635 - Stroll v. Pass (“This appeal concerns the administration of the trusts and estates of John J. Stroll, Sr., and Bettina Gloria Stroll, the parents of several parties to this probate dispute. In Docket No. AC 47165, the plaintiff, John J. Stroll, Jr., appeals from the judgment of the Superior Court rendered in favor of the defendants, Bettina Gloria Stroll Pass (Betty), Joseph G. Stroll (Joseph), and Attorney Robert E. Grant. The plaintiff claims that the court improperly (1) affirmed the order of the Probate Court removing him as the fiduciary of the parents’ trusts and estates, (2) imposed sanctions on him for violating his fiduciary duties, and (3) failed to appoint Joseph as a successor fiduciary. In Docket No. AC 46635, an appeal the plaintiff filed while the proceedings before the Superior Court remained pending, the plaintiff raises identical claims. We affirm the judgment of the Superior Court in Docket No. AC 47165 and dismiss the appeal in Docket No. AC 46635 for lack of a final judgment.”)
AC46859 - State v. Daren S. ("The defendant, Daren S., appeals
from the judgment of conviction, rendered following a
jury trial, of sexual assault in the first degree in violation
of General Statutes § 53a-70 (a) (1), sexual assault in
the third degree in violation of General Statutes § 53a-72a (a) (3), and unlawful restraint in the first degree in
violation of General Statutes § 53a-95. The defendant
claims that (1) the trial court improperly admitted evidence of uncharged sexual assaults of the victim, A, by
the defendant when she was a minor; (2) the court
improperly admitted expert testimony on delayed
reporting by victims of child sexual abuse because A
was an adult when the charged conduct occurred and
did not delay reporting that conduct; (3) the convictions
of sexual assault in the first degree and sexual assault
in the third degree amounted to multiple punishments
for the same act in violation of the guarantee against
double jeopardy set forth in the fifth amendment to
the United States constitution as applied to the states
through the fourteenth amendment; and (4) the conviction of unlawful restraint in the first degree cannot
stand because, consistent with our Supreme Court’s
holding in State v. Salamon, 287 Conn. 509, 949 A.2d
1092 (2008), the restraint used was merely incidental
to his commission of sexual assault in the first degree.
We reject the defendant’s claims and, accordingly,
affirm the judgment of the court.")
AC47825 - Bogda v. Bochenek (“The plaintiff, Robin
Bogda, appeals from the judgment of the trial court rendering summary judgment
in favor of the defendant Brian Bochenek, executor of the estate of Barbara H.
Uterstaedt. On appeal, the plaintiff claims that, in misconstruing the term
‘‘indirect’’ claims, the court improperly determined (1) that the plaintiff
lacked standing and (2) there were no genuine issues of material fact that the
defendant did not breach the terms of the parties’ agreement to release each
other from any lawsuits and claims. We determine that the plaintiff has
standing and reverse the judgment of the trial court rendering summary judgment
in the defendant’s favor.”)
Thursday, November 13
- Torrington Law Library closes at 4:00 p.m.
Friday, November 14
- Danbury Law Library is closed from 12:00 p.m. to 2:15 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library is closed from 12:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library opens at 10:30 a.m.
- Torrington Law Library is closed.
Monday, November 17
- Danbury Law Library is closed.
- Rockville Law Library closes at 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday, November 18
- Middletown Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
Wednesday, November 19
- Middletown Law Library opens at 9:30 a.m.
- New London Law Library opens at 10:45 a.m.
- Torrington Law Library closes at 4:00 p.m.
- Danbury Law Library closes at 4:15 p.m.
Thursday, November 20
- Danbury Law Library is closed from 11:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.
- Stamford Law Library is closed from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library opens from 9:15 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Friday, November 21
- Bridgeport Law Library closes at 4:00 p.m.
- Danbury Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Hartford Law Library closes at 1:15 p.m.
- Middletown Law Library closes at 1:30 p.m.
- New Britain Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Putnam Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Stamford Law Library closes at 12:00 p.m.
- Torrington Law Library closes at 1:00 p.m.
- Waterbury Law Library is closed.
The Connecticut General Assembly Office of Legislative Research (OLR) has recently published the following new reports on their website:
Connecticut's Credit Freeze Law - 2025-R-0145 - Summarizes the state’s credit freeze law. This report updates OLR Report 2015-R-0176.
Grace Period for Property Taxes - 2025-R-0162 - What is the grace period for property tax payments?
Gas-Powered Leaf Blower Restrictions - 2025-R-0139 - Describes (1) how Connecticut’s neighboring states and their municipalities regulate gas-powered leaf blowers, including bans, phase outs, or incentives to switch to electric, and (2) recent legislation regulating or incentivizing changes to alternative power sources. This report supplements OLR Report 2024-R-0177.
State Laws and Legislation Concerning the Upkeep of Veterans' Graves - 2025-R-0175 - Describes other states’ laws and legislation on maintaining veterans’ graves in non-veteran cemeteries.
Common-Law Marriage In Connecticut and Other States - 2025-R-0165 - Are common-law marriages recognized in Connecticut? (This report updates OLR Report 2013-R-0264.)
The Connecticut Law Journal, Volume LXXXVII, No. 20, for November 11, 2025 is now available.
- Table of Contents
- Volume 353: Connecticut Reports (Pages 666 - 667)
- Volume 353: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Reports
- Volume 236: Connecticut Appellate Reports (Pages 269 - 357)
- Volume 236: Memorandum Decisions (Pages 903 - 904)
- Volume 236: Cumulative Table of Cases Connecticut Appellate Reports
- Miscellaneous Notices