Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Braccidiferro

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Braccidiferro

648 A.2d 160, 231 Conn. 918, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 348

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedSeptember 20, 1994

DocketSC 15038

StatusPublished

This text of 648 A.2d 160 (Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Braccidiferro) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Connecticut primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Aetna Life & Casualty Co. v. Braccidiferro, 648 A.2d 160, 231 Conn. 918, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 348 (Colo. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 34 Conn. App. 833 (AC 11058), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[919]*919Decided September 20, 1994 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15038. Michael P. Del Sole, in support of the petition.

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77, applied to the defendant’s claim because that claim was not a ‘final judgment’ within the meaning of Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77?

“2. If the answer to question 1. is yes, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the application of Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77, to the facts of this case did not violate the plaintiff’s rights under: (a) article first, § 1, of the Connecticut constitution; (b) article first, § 10, of the United States constitution; (c) the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution; or (d) article first, § 10, of the Connecticut constitution?”

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The plaintiff’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 34 Conn. App. 833 (AC 11058), is granted, limited to the following issues:

[919]*919Decided September 20, 1994 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15038. Michael P. Del Sole, in support of the petition.

“1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77, applied to the defendant’s claim because that claim was not a ‘final judgment’ within the meaning of Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77?

“2. If the answer to question 1. is yes, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the application of Public Acts 1993, No. 93-77, to the facts of this case did not violate the plaintiff’s rights under: (a) article first, § 1, of the Connecticut constitution; (b) article first, § 10, of the United States constitution; (c) the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment to the United States constitution; or (d) article first, § 10, of the Connecticut constitution?”

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

648 A.2d 160, 231 Conn. 918, 1994 Conn. LEXIS 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aetna-life-casualty-co-v-braccidiferro-conn-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack