Kubala v. HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION

Connecticut Appellate Court

Kubala v. HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION

38 A.3d 1252, 134 Conn. App. 459, 2012 WL 921243, 2012 Conn. App. LEXIS 150

CourtConnecticut Appellate Court

DecidedMarch 27, 2012

DocketAC 33509

StatusPublished

This text of 38 A.3d 1252 (Kubala v. HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Connecticut Appellate Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kubala v. HARTFORD ROMAN CATHOLIC DIOCESAN CORPORATION, 38 A.3d 1252, 134 Conn. App. 459, 2012 WL 921243, 2012 Conn. App. LEXIS 150 (Colo. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

*460 Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, Dorothy Kubala, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing her action against the defendants, Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation, St. Augustine’s Church and Robert Rousseau, on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs action because the allegations against the defendants involved an impermissible interference with the defendants’ right to the free exercise of religion prescribed by the state and federal constitutions and General Statutes § 52-571b. We have examined the record on appeal and considered the briefs and the arguments of the parties and conclude that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. Because the trial court thoroughly addressed the arguments raised in this appeal, we adopt its well reasoned decision as a statement of the facts and the applicable law on the issue. See Kubala v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 52 Conn. Sup. 218, 41 A.3d 351 (2011). Any further discussion by this court would serve no useful purpose. See, e.g., Woodruff v. Hemingway, 297 Conn. 317, 321, 2 A.3d 857 (2010).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

*460 Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff, Dorothy Kubala, appeals from the judgment of the trial court dismissing her action against the defendants, Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corporation, St. Augustine’s Church and Robert Rousseau, on the ground that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the plaintiffs action because the allegations against the defendants involved an impermissible interference with the defendants’ right to the free exercise of religion prescribed by the state and federal constitutions and General Statutes § 52-571b. We have examined the record on appeal and considered the briefs and the arguments of the parties and conclude that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. Because the trial court thoroughly addressed the arguments raised in this appeal, we adopt its well reasoned decision as a statement of the facts and the applicable law on the issue. See Kubala v. Hartford Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp., 52 Conn. Sup. 218, 41 A.3d 351 (2011). Any further discussion by this court would serve no useful purpose. See, e.g., Woodruff v. Hemingway, 297 Conn. 317, 321, 2 A.3d 857 (2010).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

38 A.3d 1252, 134 Conn. App. 459, 2012 WL 921243, 2012 Conn. App. LEXIS 150, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kubala-v-hartford-roman-catholic-diocesan-corporation-connappct-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack