Oakley v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities
665 A.2d 609, 235 Conn. 917, 1995 Conn. LEXIS 375
CourtSupreme Court of Connecticut
DecidedSeptember 28, 1995
DocketSC 15316
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases
This text of 665 A.2d 609 (Oakley v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities) 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
Oakley v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 665 A.2d 609, 235 Conn. 917, 1995 Conn. LEXIS 375 (Colo. 1995).
Opinion
The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 38 Conn. App. 506 (AC 12900), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court correctly conclude that the Superior Court had jurisdiction to consider the plaintiffs motion for fees and expenses under General Statutes § 4-184a?”
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Oakley v. Commission On Human Rights & Opportunities
675 A.2d 851 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1996)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
665 A.2d 609, 235 Conn. 917, 1995 Conn. LEXIS 375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/oakley-v-commission-on-human-rights-opportunities-conn-1995.