Martin v. Brady

782 A.2d 1244, 258 Conn. 919, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 427
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided September 20, 2001·No. SC 16583·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 64 Conn. App. 433 (AC 20808), is granted, limited to the following issue:

“Whether the Appellate Court properly concluded that Binette v. Sabo, 244 Conn. 23, 710 A.2d 688 (1998), does not permit the plaintiffs tort action because (1) the defendants are protected by the doctrine of sovereign immunity and (2) the facts are not sufficiently egregious?”

Robert F. Vacchelli, assistant attorney general, in opposition. Decided September 20, 2001

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

Martin v. Brady, 782 A.2d 1244, 258 Conn. 919, 2001 Conn. LEXIS 427 (Colo. 2001).

782 A.2d 1244 (Martin v. Brady) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Devine v. Fusaro
205 Conn. App. 554 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2021)
Martin v. Brady
802 A.2d 814 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2002)