State v. Doscher

376 A.2d 359, 172 Conn. 592, 1977 Conn. LEXIS 933
Supreme Court of Connecticut·Decided March 29, 1977·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The petition for certification is denied, it not appearing that “there are special and important reasons” to grant certification. Practice Book § 742. We repeat what we said in State v. Chisholm, 155 Conn. 706, 707, 236 A.2d 465: “[A] denial of certification does not necessarily indicate our approval either of the result reached by the Appellate Division or of the opinion rendered by it.”

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

State v. Doscher, 376 A.2d 359, 172 Conn. 592, 1977 Conn. LEXIS 933 (Colo. 1977).

376 A.2d 359 (State v. Doscher) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of New London v. Foss & Bourke, Inc.
886 A.2d 1217 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2005)
A. Aiudi & Sons, LLC v. Planning & Zoning Commission
806 A.2d 77 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2002)
Clarke v. Commissioner of Correction
732 A.2d 754 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1999)
Mandanici v. Zoning Board of Appeals
717 A.2d 287 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1998)
Republic Insurance v. Pat Dinardo Auto Sales, Inc.
678 A.2d 516 (Connecticut Superior Court, 1995)
Grieco v. Zoning Commission
627 A.2d 432 (Supreme Court of Connecticut, 1993)
Pagano v. Board of Education
492 A.2d 197 (Connecticut Appellate Court, 1985)
Williams v. O'Neill
500 F. Supp. 913 (D. Connecticut, 1980)