Fish v. Fish

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Fish v. Fish

883 A.2d 1243, 275 Conn. 924, 2005 Conn. LEXIS 417, 2005 WL 2841346

CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut

DecidedSeptember 20, 2005

DocketSC 17500

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 883 A.2d 1243 (Fish v. Fish) 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

Fish v. Fish, 883 A.2d 1243, 275 Conn. 924, 2005 Conn. LEXIS 417, 2005 WL 2841346 (Colo. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 90 Conn. App. 744 (AC 24542), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court was not required to apply a heightened jurisdictional pleading requirement and burden of persuasion as required under Roth v. Weston, 259 Conn. 202, 234-35, 789 A.2d 431 (2002)?”

[925]*925Decided September 20, 2005 Louis Kiefer, in support of the petition. Emily J. Moskowitz, in opposition.

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

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 90 Conn. App. 744 (AC 24542), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court was not required to apply a heightened jurisdictional pleading requirement and burden of persuasion as required under Roth v. Weston, 259 Conn. 202, 234-35, 789 A.2d 431 (2002)?”

[925]*925Decided September 20, 2005 Louis Kiefer, in support of the petition. Emily J. Moskowitz, in opposition.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

883 A.2d 1243, 275 Conn. 924, 2005 Conn. LEXIS 417, 2005 WL 2841346, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fish-v-fish-conn-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack