A Brief Review
A Connecticut Appellate Law Blog
TOPICS:
- A Brief Review (21)
- Abuse of discretion (2)
- Adequate record for review (4)
- Administrative appeal (1)
- Alternative grounds for affirmance (3)
- Appeal deadlines (1)
- Appellant (7)
- Appellate motions (4)
- Appellate process (8)
- Appellate stay (2)
- Appellee (3)
- Breach of contract (1)
- Child support appeals (1)
- Civil appeals (3)
- Comparative negligence (1)
- Complaint (1)
- Complex litigation (1)
- Connecticut Appellate Court (9)
- Connecticut Practice Book (8)
- Connecticut Rules of Appellate Procedure (8)
- Connecticut Supreme Court (2)
- Constructive notice (1)
- CORE 4 (3)
- Custody and visitation (1)
- Family appeals (4)
- Golding (1)
- Insurance (1)
- Issue preservation (4)
- Land use (1)
- Motion for articulation (1)
- Motion for review (1)
- Motion to dismiss (1)
- Motion to open (1)
- Motion to reargue (3)
- Negligence (2)
- Personal injury (2)
- Plain error (1)
- Pleadings (1)
- Plenary review (1)
- Post-judgment motions (4)
- Preliminary appeal papers (2)
- Premises liability (1)
- Probate appeals (1)
- Standing (2)
- Statutory interpretation (1)
- Subject matter jurisdiction (3)
- Supervisory authority (1)
- Trial court motions (2)
- Trial strategy (1)
- Unpreserved issues (1)
- Workers' compensation insurance law (1)
- Zoning (1)
- Firm News (16)
Category: Negligence
-
The Connecticut Appellate Court’s recent decision in Hope v. Willimantic Partners, LLC addresses several recurring issues in premises liability litigation. The case arose from a serious fall in a commercial parking lot and resulted in a substantial jury verdict for the plaintiffs—one that the Appellate Court affirmed in full. For plaintiff-side trial attorneys, Hope is not about a new rule of law. Instead, it offers
-
The Connecticut Supreme Court recently tackled a nuanced legal issue in Suprynowicz v. Tohan: whether allegations involving a reproductive endocrinologist’s misconduct during IVF procedures should be classified as wrongful life claims or ordinary negligence. This decision provides key insights into Connecticut tort law and the fine line between these two claim types, offering guidance to