Northrup v. Witkowski

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Northrup v. Witkowski

173 A.3d 392, 327 Conn. 971

Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided November 21, 2017·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

The plaintiffs' petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 175 Conn. App. 223, 167 A.3d 443 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the maintenance and repair of storm water systems is a discretionary duty, in light of this state's precedents, including Spitzer v. Waterbury, 113 Conn. 84, 154 A. 157 (1931), and Silberstein v. 54 Hillcrest Park Associates, LLC, 135 Conn. App. 262, 41 A.3d 1147 (2012) ?"

MULLINS, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

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

The plaintiffs' petition for certification to appeal from the Appellate Court, 175 Conn. App. 223, 167 A.3d 443 (2017), is granted, limited to the following issue:

"Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the maintenance and repair of storm water systems is a discretionary duty, in light of this state's precedents, including Spitzer v. Waterbury, 113 Conn. 84, 154 A. 157 (1931), and Silberstein v. 54 Hillcrest Park Associates, LLC, 135 Conn. App. 262, 41 A.3d 1147 (2012) ?"

MULLINS, J., did not participate in the consideration of or decision on this petition.

Northrup v. Witkowski, 173 A.3d 392, 327 Conn. 971 (Colo. 2017).

Pincite

173 A.3d 392 (Northrup v. Witkowski) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related