Sgd Bnmmdbshbts K_v Qdonqsdq Btltk_shud Hmcdw _mc S ... - Law Reporter by pengtt

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 12

									                           The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index
                                 and Tables for Volume 36, Issues 1–8
                         To be removed and filed at the back of the Volume 36 binder.


                                                                 TABLE OF CASES
ABCO Refrigeration Supply Corp., Stop & Shop                                    Dodson, Kumiega v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
   Supermarket Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72          Doe v. Johnson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Adams v. New Hartford PZC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63              Durham, Wlodkowski v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Admin., Unemployment Compensation Act, Mims v. 219                              Eder Bros., Inc. v. Wine Merchants of CT, Inc. . . . . 209
Alexander v. Commissioner of Administrative Services . 21                       Edward F. Foote, Trust, Fleet Bank v. . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Allen, Petroka v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268     Eisenberg v. Wepco Plastic, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Allstate Insurance Co., American States Ins. Co. v. . 58                        Esposito v. Farricielli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
Allstate Insurance Co., Aurio v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39             Estate of Clark, Thiemann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 143
American States Insurance Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co. . . 58                       Evans v. Marks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Animal Rights Front, Inc. v. Jacques . . . . . . . . . . . . 85                 Evans v. Yamaha Motor Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Armstrong, Reid v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126        F.O.H., Inc. v. Constitution Holding, LLC . . . . . . . . 210
Aurio v. Allstate Insurance Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39            Fairfield Country Day School Corp., Thompson v. . . . 45
Baldwin v. Zolnoski . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262         Falls Church Group, Ltd. v. Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP . . 111
Barth Insurance Agency, Inc., Hotak v. . . . . . . . . . 181                    Farrar v. Stratford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Batson, Brought v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189        Farricielli, Esposito v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
Beaulieu, Burt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152       Fleet Bank v. Edward F. Foote, Trust . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Benham v. Wallingford Auto Park, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . 87                  Fleet National Bank v. Squillacote . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
Beresford, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29      Forman v. Walpuck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
Best Friends Pet Care, Inc. v. Design Learned, Inc. . 99                        Foss v. Nadeau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Bieler v. Continental Insurance Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . 248                 Fox, Towne Brooke Development, LLC v. . . . . . . . . . 261
Bieluch v. Cook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185       Fugiero, Hunt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Bottinelli v. Bottinelli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224      GATX Financial Corp. v. National Fairways
Bottling Group, LLC, Suitt Construction Co. v. . . . . 154                         Partners I, LP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Bridgeport v. Triple 9 of Broad Street . . . . . . . . . . . . 56               Geenty, Inc. v. Smernoff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
Brought v. Batson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189         Geremia Development Corp., Hoyt v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Brown & Welsh, P.C. v. Midstate Medical Center . . 286                          Gersten, Lomansky v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Bruderhof Communities, Streeter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69                 Giansiracusa, Venditti v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
Buonauto v. Waterbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199             Glastonbury Police Officers Ass’n v. Glastonbury . . 192
Burt v. Beaulieu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152        Glastonbury, Glastonbury Police Officers Ass’n v. . . 192
Butler, Carpenter v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178        Graham, Clemens v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Cannizzaro & Assoc., Tip Top Roofing, LLC v. . . . . . 30                       Greentree Motors of Danbury, Western Connecticut
Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., Harty v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79                 Collision Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Carpenter v. Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178         Grenaille, Whitby School, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
Chalker, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4     Guttman v. Department of Mental Retardation . . . . . 50
Chelouche, Darby v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93        Haight, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Clay v. Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67   Hartford Casualty Insurance Co. v. Myers . . . . . . . . 256
Clemens v. Graham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34          Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. Warner . . . . . . . . . . 215
Collins v. Peerless Insurance Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294               Hartford Hospital, Plourde v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Colonial Penn Insurance Co. v. Dimitriadis . . . . . . . 61                     Harty v. Cantor Fitzgerald & Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
Commissioner of Administrative Services, Alexander v. . 21                      Heaford v. Danbury Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
Connecticut State Dental Commission, Mendlinger v. . 266                        Hendrickson, Cornerstone Bank v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
Constitution Holding, LLC, F.O.H., Inc. v. . . . . . . . 210                    Henneberry, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Consumer Incentive Services v. Memberworks, Inc. . 298                          Horelick v. Weston PZC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Continental Insurance Co., Bieler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 248                Hoskinson v. North Canaan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Cook, Bieluch v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185      Hotak v. Barth Insurance Agency, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . 181
Cornerstone Bank v. Hendrickson . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288                   Hotchkiss, Page v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
Cornfield Point Association v. Old Saybrook . . . . . . 129                     Hoyt v. Geremia Development Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Cross, Jones v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85      Hunt v. Fugiero . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Cunningham v. Neun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150            Intravia v. Intravia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Cutler v. Whitman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206         ITT Hartford, Legnos v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
Danbury Hospital, Heaford v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138              Jacobs, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Danbury Hospital, Zurzola v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207              Jacques, Animal Rights Front, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
Darby v. Chelouche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93         Johnson, Doe v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
Davis Tree & Logging, LLC, Smit v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77                 Jones v. Cross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
DeBonee v. Lalumiere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281            Joshua’s Tract Conservation & Historic Trust, Inc. v.
Delmoral v. Tilcon Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214                   Windham Zoning Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239
Dennis v. Dennis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161        Kelly v. Kelly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217
Department of Children & Families, Rucci v. . . . . . . . 7                     Kinsey v. Pacific Employers Insurance Co. . . . . . . . 177
Department of Mental Retardation, Guttman v. . . . . 50                         Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates, P.C., Mohegan Tribal
Design Learned, Inc., Best Friends Pet Care, Inc. v. . 99                          Gaming Authority v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225, 249
Diaz, Levine v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137     Kumiega v. Dodson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Dimitriadis, Colonial Penn Insurance Co. v. . . . . . . . 61                    Kutcher, Uberti v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
                              The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                                         36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
La Page, Pointer v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153        Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton, LLP, Zymol
La Societe Metro Cash & Carry France v. Time                                        Enterprises, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
   Warner Cable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170        Skycraft, Inc., Webster v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Lalumiere, DeBonee v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281            Smernoff, Geenty, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
LaPorte v. LaPorte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179       Smit v. Davis Tree & Logging, LLC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
Legnos v. ITT Hartford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91        Smith v. Regional School District No. 12 . . . . . . . . 265
Levine v. Diaz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137     Squillacote, Fleet National Bank v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
Lin v. National Railroad Passenger Corp. . . . . . 251, 252                      State v. Beresford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Logan v. New Haven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284           State v. Chalker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Lomansky v. Gersten . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 259            State v. Haight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Lynam, Raposa v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174         State v. Henneberry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202
Maffeo v. Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147      State v. Jacobs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Manchester, Shah v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33         State v. Phillips . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Marks, Evans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41       Stop & Shop Supermarket Co. v. ABCO Refrigeration
Masotta, McFarlane v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254             Supply Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
Mathews v. Westview Associates, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . 263                   Stratford, Farrar v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 188
Mazzuca v. Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144          Streeter v. Bruderhof Communities . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
McCann v. Screnci . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68         Suitt Construction Co. v. Bottling Group, LLC . . . . 154
McFarlane v. Masotta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254           Sullivan, Mazzuca v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Memberworks, Inc., Consumer Incentive Services v. . 298                          Thetreault v. Wolford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Mendlinger v. Connecticut State Dental Commission . . 266                        Thiemann v. Estate of Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35, 143
Middlebrook, Pickering v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223            Thomas v. Warden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Middletown, Ruffino v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169           Thompson v. Fairfield Country Day School Corp. . . . 45
Midstate Medical Center, Brown & Welsh, P.C. v. . . . 286                        Thornton Oil Corp., White v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Mims v. Admin., Unemployment Compensation Act . . 219                            Tilcon Connecticut, Delmoral v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214
Minoli v. Minoli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10    Time Warner Cable, La Societe Metro Cash & Carry
Mohegan Tribal Gaming Authority v. Kohn Pedersen                                    France v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170
   Fox Associates, P.C. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 225, 249             Tip Top Roofing, LLC v. Cannizzaro & Assoc. . . . . . . 30
Morgan Whitney, Inc. v. Providence & Worcester                                   Towne Brooke Development, LLC v. Fox . . . . . . . . . 261
   Railroad Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
                                                                                 Triple 9 of Broad Street, Bridgeport v. . . . . . . . . . . . 56
Myers, Hartford Casualty Insurance Co. v. . . . . . . . 256
                                                                                 Tyler, Cooper & Alcorn, LLP, Falls Church
Nadeau, Foss v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
                                                                                    Group, Ltd. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
National Fairways Partners I, LP, GATX Financial
                                                                                 Uberti v. Kutcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
   Corp. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
                                                                                 Venditti v. Giansiracusa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
National Railroad Passenger Corp., Lin v. . . . . 251, 252
                                                                                 Wallingford Auto Park, Inc., Benham v. . . . . . . . . . . 87
Neun, Cunningham v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
                                                                                 Walpuck, Forman v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
New Hartford PZC, Adams v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
                                                                                 Walter D. Sullivan Co., Rouleau v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
New Haven, Logan v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
North Canaan, Hoskinson v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13              Warden, Salaam v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
North Haven Education Ass’n, North Haven v. . . . . . 292                        Warden, Thomas v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
North Haven v. North Haven Education Ass’n . . . . . 292                         Warner, Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. . . . . . . . . . . 215
Old Saybrook, Cornfield Point Association v. . . . . . . 129                     Waterbury, Buonauto v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199
Pacific Employers Insurance Co., Kinsey v. . . . . . . . 177                     Weber v. Wilder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Page v. Hotchkiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193        Webster v. Skycraft, Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Parker v. Wolinsky-Friedlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166              Weinberg v. Weinberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
Peerless Insurance Co., Collins v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294               Wepco Plastic, Inc., Eisenberg v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Petroka v. Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268     Western Connecticut Collision Corp. v. Greentree
Phillips, State v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15       Motors of Danbury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
Pickering v. Middlebrook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223           Weston PZC, Horelick v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
Piskura v. Piskura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201       Westview Associates, Inc., Mathews v. . . . . . . . . . . 263
Plourde v. Hartford Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52            Whitby School, Inc. v. Grenaille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 285
Pointer v. La Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153       White v. Thornton Oil Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
Poulin v. Yasner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29      Whitman, Cutler v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 206
Providence & Worcester Railroad Co., Morgan                                      Wilder, Weber v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
   Whitney, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305        Wilson-Coker, Semerzakis v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
Radlo v. Radlo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136     Windham Zoning Commission, Joshua’s Tract
Raposa v. Lynam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174             Conservation & Historic Trust, Inc. v. . . . . . . . . 239
Regional School District No. 12, Smith v. . . . . . . . . 265                    Wine Merchants of CT, Inc., Eder Bros., Inc. v. . . . 209
Reid v. Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126        Wlodkowski v. Durham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Rouleau v. Walter D. Sullivan Co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75               Wolcott, Saucier v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
Rucci v. Department of Children & Families . . . . . . . . 7                     Wolford, Thetreault v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
Ruffino v. Middletown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169          Wolinsky-Friedlan, Parker v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166
Salaam v. Warden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123         Yamaha Motor Corp., Evans v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 221
Saucier v. Wolcott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110       Yasner, Poulin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Scott, Maffeo v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147     Zolnoski, Baldwin v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
Screnci, McCann v. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68        Zurzola v. Danbury Hospital . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207
Semerzakis v. Wilson-Coker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237               Zymol Enterprises, Inc. v. Sheppard, Mullin,
Shah v. Manchester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33             Richter & Hampton, LLP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
                               The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                                           36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1–8 (February 23, 2003)
                                     CUMULATIVE TABLE OF CONNECTICUT STATUTES AND
                                      PRACTICE BOOK RULES FOR VOLUME 36, ISSUES 1–8
7-163a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284      45a-187 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
7-472 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192     45a-242(a)(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
7-474(f) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169      46b-36g(a)(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
8-3(g) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 239    46b-44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
8-8(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63   46b-115q . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
12-117a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107, 199          47-27(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
12-367(d) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35      47-33a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
13a-144 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144, 223          52-59b(a)(1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
13b-292(e) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305        52-72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
14-227a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29, 109         52-102b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 297
14-295 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39     52-146c(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
17a-101a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7      52-146f(5) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137, 178
17a-210(d) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50       52-182 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
18-85b(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21      52-183 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
18-98d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123      52-192a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
19a-17b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52      52-212a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
19a-343 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210       52-225a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
20-122 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266
                                                                                    52-257(b)(12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
20-327 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
                                                                                    52-260(f) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
22a-16 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85, 162
                                                                                    52-275(b)(12) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
22a-427 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150
                                                                                    52-278a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 262
22a-452(a) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
                                                                                    52-380a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
26-311 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
30-6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209    52-409 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282
30-102 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .85, 148, 281          52-422 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192
31-72 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79    52-434a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
31-107 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192      52-550(a)(4) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
31-249b . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219       52-557m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
31-249g(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41       52-572h(o) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223
31-290a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41      52-576 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105, 193
33-1056 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23      52-592 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 107, 152, 294
33-182g . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 266       52-593 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
33-929(e) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26      52-595 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
34-141 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90     52-607 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
35-24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144     54-65a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
36b-3(17) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68      54-86e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
38a-336(a)(2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177         P.A. 03-91 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148, 281
38a-816(6) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181        P.A. 03-202 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
38a-816(8) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181        P.B. 13-4(3) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
42-110a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270       P.B. 13-9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252
42a-2-275 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105         P.B. 23-61 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297

                                         CUMULATIVE INDEX FOR VOLUME 36, ISSUES 1–8
Administrative Agencies, Appeal to Courts                                             Arbitrability, Misc. Cases, Arbitration Clause of a Collective
 Appeal Period, Accidental Failure of Suit Statute Can-                                Bargaining Agreement Between a Board of Education and
                                                                                       Its Employees Applies to a Claim by Employees to a
  not Be Relied Upon to Save an Improperly Served
                                                                                       Proportionate Share of Stock Received Upon the Conver-
  Administrative Appeal, Including a Property Tax Ap-                                  sion of Its Medical Insurer Into a Stock Company, Even
  peal, 107                                                                            Though the Town Rather than the Board Is the Policy
  Contested Case, No Right to Appeal Decision by the                                   Holder and the Town Is Not a Party to the CBA, 292
   Department of Mental Retardation to Deny a Client’s                                Award, Damages
   Request for Emergency Status on the Waiting List for                                “Civil Action” as Used in the Statute Authorizing Dou-
                                                                                         ble Damages for an Employee Prevailing in a Civil
   Group Home Placement, 50                                                              Action for Wages Includes an Arbitration Proceeding,
Arbitration                                                                              79
                                                                                       Double Damages Under the Wage Collection Statute
  Action to Compel or Stay                                                               Constitute Remedial Rather Than Punitive Damages
   Jurisdiction, Court Must Dismiss and May Not Stay an                                  and Therefore Are Not Subject to a Clause in an
     Action Involving a Dispute Subject to an Arbitration                                Arbitration Award Prohibiting Any Award of “Special,
     Agreement Which Provides that Arbitration Is a Con-                                 Exemplary or Punitive Damages,” 79
     dition Precedent to Litigation, 282                                              Pendente Lite Court Orders, Misc. Cases, Police Union
                                                                                       May Seek a Court Injunction While an Arbitration Is
   Misc. Cases, Individual Union Member Lacks Standing                                 Pending Before the State Board of Mediation and Arbi-
     to Bring an Action Against an Employer to Compel                                  tration, Even Though an Alternate Administrative
     Arbitration Under a Collective Bargaining Agreement,                              Remedy May Also Be Available from the State Board of
     188                                                                               Labor Relations, 192
                       The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                                36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
Attorneys                                                      Civil Service, Retirement Benefits, Misc. Cases, Munici-
 Code of Ethics, Disqualification, Court Reconsiders and        pal Ordinance Requiring the Offset of Workers’ Compen-
   Reverses Its Earlier Holding that an Attorney Is Dis-        sation Benefits Against Retirement Benefits Does Not
   qualified from Representing a Client at a Trial at Which     Apply to Pension Benefits Paid Pursuant to an Early
   the Attorney Will Be a Witness, 206                          Retirement Plan, 169
 Compensation, Misc. Cases, Opinion Establishes a              Committees and References, State Trial Referee, In
   Method for Valuing Services Provided in Connection           General, Assessment of Damages by a Panel of Judge
   with a Large Number of Pending Collection Cases              Trial Referees in an Eminent Domain Proceeding Con-
   Transferred from One Law Firm to Another, 286                stitutes a “Judgment” and Therefore Is Subject to the
 Disqualification, Former Clients, Attorney Who De-             Four-month Time Limit for Opening a Judgment, 56
   fended a Physician with Respect to a Medical Malprac-       Conflict of Laws, Contracts, Misc. Cases, Connecticut
   tice Claim Is Disqualified from Representing a Plaintiff     Law Applies to the Legality of an Exclusion in an Unin-
   15 Years Later with Respect to Another Malpractice           sured Motorist Policy Issued in Florida to a Policyholder
   Claim Against the Same Physician, 97                         Who Primarily Resides in Connecticut with Respect to
Automobiles                                                     Claims from a Connecticut Accident, 58
 Damages, Multiple Damages, 2003 Public Act Amending           Conspiracy, Civil Conspiracy, In General, Connecticut
   the Multiple Damages Statute to Preclude the Imposi-         Recognizes “Civil Conspiracy” as an Independent Cause
   tion of Vicarious Liability for Punitive Damages on          of Action, 261
   Owners and Lessors Is a Clarifying Amendment and            Constitutional Law
   Therefore Retroactive to Pre-act Accidents, 39               Due Process, Liberty Interests, Prison Inmate Has a
 Negligent Operation by Another                                   Constitutionally Protected Liberty Interest in a Sex
   Agent or Employee of the Owner, 2003 Public Act                Offender Classification and Therefore May Challenge
     Amending the Multiple Damages Statute to Preclude            the Commissioner’s Classification by a Writ of Habeas
     the Imposition of Vicarious Liability for Punitive Dam-      Corpus, 1
     ages on Owners and Lessors Is a Clarifying Amendment       Right to Privacy, In General, Internet Communications
     and Therefore Retroactive to Pre-act Accidents, 39           Are Subject to a Qualified Constitutional Right to
   Lessors, 2003 Public Act Amending the Multiple Dam-            Privacy, 170
     ages Statute to Preclude the Imposition of Vicarious      Contracts
     Liability for Punitive Damages on Owners and Lessors       Actions, Procedural Matters
     Is a Clarifying Amendment and Therefore Retroactive          Contractual Time Limitation Requiring that an Action
     to Pre-act Accidents, 39                                       Be “Started” Within One Year Is Satisfied Only by the
   2003 Family Car Doctrine, Public Act Amending the                Successful Commencement of an Action; an At-
     Multiple Damages Statute to Preclude the Imposition            tempted Action Which Is Dismissed for Improper
     of Vicarious Liability for Punitive Damages on Owners          Service of Process Is Not Sufficient, 294
     and Lessors Is a Clarifying Amendment and Therefore          Rule that the Accidental Failure of Suit Statute Does
     Retroactive to Pre-act Accidents, 39                           Not Apply to Contractual Limitations Periods, Includ-
Aviation, Warsaw Convention, In General, Convention                 ing Those Statutorily Mandated for Fire Insurance
 Preempts Local Causes of Action Regardless of Whether              Policies, Applies Regardless of the Reasons for the
 Comparable Relief Is Available Under the Convention, 69            Dismissal of the Earlier Action, 294
Bail, Bonds, Forfeiture                                         Construction
 Sentencing a Criminal Defendant in Absentia Immedi-              Covenant of Good Faith, Bank’s Seven-year Delay in
   ately After Forfeiting the Defendant’s Bail Bond Will            Enforcing a Guaranty Constitutes a Violation of the
   Release the Bondsperson from Liability Under the                 Covenant of Good Faith that Precludes Recovery of
   Bond, 231                                                        Interest After an Allowance of a Reasonable Period for
 Technical Errors in Wording by a Court Clerk When                  Enforcement, 270
   Calling a Bond in Open Court Do Not Invalidate a Bond          Misc. Cases
   Forfeiture, 231                                                  Software Developer’s Refusal to Provide a Customer
Brokers, Business Finders, Remuneration                               with Password Information Needed to Access the
 Generally Phrased “Noncircumvention Agreement” Be-                   Customer’s Own Computers Constitutes a Breach
   tween a Business Consultant and a Client Is Too Vague              of Contract, 193
   to Be Enforceable, 298                                           Used Car Dealership’s Agreement to Replace a Vehicle
 “Lehman” Formula Is Applied as the Appropriate Mea-                  If a Customer Is Not “Completely Satisfied” Must Be
   sure of Damages for an Unjust Enrichment Award to a                Honored Even If the Customer’s Dissatisfaction Is
   Business Consultant for Identifying an Acquisition                 Unreasonable, 87
   Candidate to a Client, 298                                     Noncircumvention Agreements, Generally Phrased
Carriers, Railroads, Grade Crossings                                “Noncircumvention Agreement” Between a Business
 Commissioner of Transportation’s Authority to Regulate             Consultant and a Client Is Too Vague to Be Enforce-
   the Closing of Grade Crossings Applies Only to Cross-            able, 298
   ings Having an Impact on the Public Interest and               Waiver of Claims, Clause Imposing on a Property
   Therefore Not to a Crossing Providing Access to a Single         Owner an Obligation to Provide All-risk Insurance
   Privately-owned Parcel, 305                                      Coverage and Mutually Waiving Claims Between the
 Contract Authorizing the Use of a Grade Crossing by the            Owner and Contractor for Property Damage Extends
   Owner of an Otherwise Landlocked Parcel Constitutes              to Damage Caused by the Contractor’s Own Negli-
   a License Rather Than Lease and Therefore Is Termi-              gence, 72
   nable at the Will of the Railroad, 305                       Construction Contracts
 Private Property Owner’s Expenditure of Funds to Main-           Compensation, Real Estate Acquisition Costs and Per-
   tain a Grade Crossing Does Not Render a License to               mit Fees Are Not Included for Purposes of Calculating
   Use the Crossing Irrevocable, 305                                a Builder’s Fee of “10% of Total Construction Costs,”
 Statute Precluding the Acquisition Through Adverse                 100
   Possession of Property Owned by a Railroad Applies to          Misc. Cases, Liability for the Retained Risk Under an
   Claims for Easement by Necessity as well as Easements            “Owner-controlled Project Liability Insurance Policy”
   by Prescription, 305                                             Is Discussed, 225
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                               36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1–8 (February 23, 2003)
 Home Improvement Act                                         Particular Items, Medical Expert Testimony
  Definitions, Act Applies to a Contract for Improvements       Costs of Deposing an Opponent’s Medical Expert Re-
    to Any Residence; Use as the Owner’s Personal Resi-          main Unrecoverable In Spite of Recent Amendments
    dence Is Not Required, 30                                    to the Statutes Governing the Recovery of Costs for
  In General, Act Applies to a Contract for Improvements         Expert Witness Testimony, 29
    to a Structure with Mixed Commercial and Residen-           Statutory Authorization for the Recovery of Fees for
    tial Uses, But Only to Services Related to the Resi-         Expert Medical Testimony Does Not Include a
    dential Portions of the Structure, 30                        Witness’s Trial Preparation Time, 29
                                                              Procedural Matters, Misc. Cases, Damages for Purposes
 Quasi and Implied Contracts
                                                                of Determining Eligibility for Relief Under the Offer of
  Quantum Meruit, Counts for Unjust Enrichment and              Judgment Statute Includes Costs Only If Expressly
    Quantum Meruit May Not Incorporate Allegations              Authorized as Part of a Specific Relief Established by
    from a Joined Breach of Contract Count If the Alle-         Statute, 4
    gations Recognize the Existence of the Alleged Con-      Courts, Jurisdiction, Exhaustion of Remedies, Police
    tract, 285                                                Union May Seek a Court Injunction While an Arbitration
  Unjust Enrichment                                           Is Pending Before the State Board of Mediation and
    Counts for Unjust Enrichment and Quantum Meruit           Arbitration, Even Though an Alternate Administrative
      May Not Incorporate Allegations from a Joined           Remedy May Also Be Available from the State Board of
      Breach of Contract Count If the Allegations Recog-      Labor Relations, 192
      nize the Existence of the Alleged Contract, 285        Criminal Law and Procedure, Punishment, Parole, Con-
    “Lehman” Formula Is Applied as the Appropriate            dition Requiring that a Parolee’s Continued Release Be
      Measure of Damages for an Unjust Enrichment             Not “Incompatible with the Welfare of Society” Is Not Void
      Award to a Business Consultant for Identifying an       as Unconstitutionally Vague, 126
      Acquisition Candidate to a Client, 298                 Deeds, Construction, Misc. Cases, Quitclaim Deed to a
 Remedies, Election of Remedies, Commencement of a            Municipality of “All Right and Title and Interest” in the
  Foreclosure Action Does Not Constitute an “Election of      Streets of a Subdivision Conveys the Fee Interest in the
  Remedies” Barring a Later Action to Enforce a Guar-         Roads, Not Merely an Easement, 129
  anty Agreement, 270                                        Dentistry, Practice, Transfer of Ownership, Statutory
 UCC, Sale of Goods                                           Authorization for the Transfer of the Stock of a Profes-
                                                              sional Corporation to a Deceased Professional’s Estate
  Contract for the Construction of a Plastic Injection
                                                              Authorizes Ownership by an Estate of a Dental Practice
    Mold for the Manufacture of a Specialized Part Is a
                                                              Only for the Period of Time Reasonably Needed to Ar-
    Contract for the Sale of Goods and Therefore Is
                                                              range a Transfer to Another Professional Entity, 266
    Subject to the UCC Four-year Limitation Period, 105
                                                             Discovery
  Person Hired to Develop a Software Application for Use
                                                              Bill of Discovery, Misc. Cases
    in the Hiring Party’s Own Office Is a Service Provider
                                                                Bill of Discovery May Be Used to Obtain Access to an
    Rather than a Seller of Goods, 193
                                                                 Insurer’s Claims File to Determine Whether a Refusal
Corporations                                                     to Engage in Negotiations Constituted a Breach of the
 Limited Liability Companies                                     Covenant of Good Faith with the Customer, 91
  Duty to Other Members, Violation of the Duty of Good          Bill of Discovery May Be Used to Require that an
    Faith to Other LLC Members May Be Enjoined With-             Internet Provider Disclose the Identity of the Author
    out Proof of Irreparable Harm or the Lack of an              of an Allegedly Defamatory Email, 170
    Adequate Remedy at Law, 90                                Depositions, Misc. Cases, Court Orders Compliance with
  Membership Interests, Whether an LLC Membership               a Notice of Deposition Served with a Summons and
    Interest Constitutes a “Security” Subject to the Con-       Complaint in a Medical Malpractice Action, 93
    necticut Uniform Securities Act Normally Cannot Be        Particular Matters
    Resolved on a Motion for Summary Judgment, 68               Expert Testimony
                                                                 Flat Fee of $5000 for Several Hours of Deposition by
 Professional Corporations, Ownership, Authorization for           a Medical Expert Is Unreasonable; a Fee of $400 Per
  the Transfer of the Stock of a Professional Corporation          Hour Is Authorized, 189
  to a Deceased Professional’s Estate Authorizes Owner-          Party Seeking Discovery Must Pay for Deposition
  ship by the Estate Only for the Period of Time Reason-           Preparation Time, 189
  ably Needed to Arrange a Transfer to Another                  Photographs of Another Party’s Property, Party’s Fail-
  Professional Entity, 266                                       ure to Obtain Prior Court Approval Before Entering
 Uniform Securities Act, Definitions, Whether an LLC             onto Another Party’s Property to Take Photographs
  Membership Interest Constitutes a “Security” Normally          Does Not Render the Photographs Inadmissible, 252
  Cannot Be Resolved on a Motion for Summary Judg-            Privileges
  ment, 68                                                      Medical Peer Review Proceedings
Correctional Institutions, Recovery of Incarceration             Privilege Is Waived by Placing a Document in the
 Costs, In General, Statute Creating a Lien for the Recov-         Subject Patient’s Medical File, 52
 ery of Incarceration Costs Against 50% of an Inmate’s           Statutory Privilege May Be Waived, 52
 Right to a Distribution from a Parent’s Estate Does Not        Psychiatric Records
 Violate Due Process or Equal Protection Constitutional          Allegations of Damages in the Form of an “Inability to
 Rights, 21                                                        Carry Out Normal Activities” or a “Decrease in the
Costs                                                              Enjoyment of Life’s Pleasures” Do Not Introduce the
                                                                   Claimant’s Mental Condition as an Issue in a Personal
 Expert Witness Fees                                               Injury Case and Therefore Do Not Authorize Discovery
  In General, Party Seeking Discovery from an Expert               of the Claimant’s Psychiatric Records, 178
    Must Pay for Deposition Preparation Time, 189                Claim of Migraine Headaches in a Personal Injury
  Misc. Cases, Flat Fee of $5000 for Several Hours of              Action Puts a Plaintiff’s Psychiatric Condition in
    Deposition by a Medical Expert Is Unreasonable; a              Issue and Therefore Waives the Privilege for Com-
    Fee of $400 Per Hour Is Authorized, 189                        munications with a Psychiatrist, 137
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                              36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
Driving Under the Influence, Definitions                    Evidence
 Operation of a Motor Vehicle, Person Asleep Behind the      Documentary Evidence
  Wheel of a Vehicle with the Key in the Ignition May Be       Handwriting Evidence, Reliability of a “Graphoanalyst”
  Considered to Be “Operating” the Vehicle Even Though           as an Expert Is Compared Unfavorably to the Reliabil-
  the Ignition Is in the Off Position, 109                       ity of an “Examiner of Questioned Documents,” 185
 Public Highway, Park Road Is a “Public Highway” Subject       Photographs, Photographs of the Body of a Person
  to the DWI Statutes Even Though a Permit Is Required           Struck by a Train Offered to Establish the Location
  for Night Use, 29                                              and Speed of the Train at the Time of the Accident
Eminent Domain                                                   Are Admissible in a Personal Injury Action In Spite of
 Compensation and Damages, Misc. Cases, Seller of Real           Their Gruesome Appearance, 251
  Estate Has No Duty to Disclose to a Buyer Amounts          Expert and Opinion Evidence, Handwriting Evidence,
  Offered by the Government in Preliminary Negotiations        Reliability of a “Graphoanalyst” as an Expert Is Com-
  Concerning a Possible Eminent Domain Taking, at Least        pared Unfavorably to the Reliability of an “Examiner of
  Where the Buyer Is Aware of the Possible Taking, 268         Questioned Documents,” 185
 Procedural Matters, Procedure in Superior Court             In General, Illegally Obtained Evidence, Fact that Evi-
  Assessment of Damages by a Panel of Judge Trial              dence Has Been Obtained Through Illegal Means Does
    Referees Constitutes a “Judgment” and Therefore Is         Not Render the Evidence Inadmissible in a Civil Action,
    Subject to the Four-month Time Limit for Opening a         252
    Judgment, 56
                                                            Executors and Administrators, Suits By and Against,
  Challenge to a Government Agency’s Deduction of
                                                             Procedural Matters, Action Incorrectly Commenced
    Pending Taxes Against Damages Assessed in an Em-
                                                             Against an Estate Rather than the Estate Executor May
    inent Domain Proceeding Is Subject to the Statutory
                                                             Be Saved Under the Accidental Failure Statute, 152
    Four-month Time Limit for Opening a Judgment, 56
Environmental Law                                           Guaranty
 Endangered Species Act, Exemptions, Enforcement Ac-         Actions to Enforce
  tion Against an Otherwise Legal Activity by a Private        Defenses
  Landowner Cannot Be Based on an Impact on an En-               Banks’ Failure to Comply with the Customary Prac-
  dangered Species Because the Connecticut Endangered              tice of Commencing Suit to Enforce a Mortgage
  Species Act Exempts Activities on Private Land, 85               Within 4 Months Following Demand Does Not Con-
 Enforcement, Private Actions                                      stitute a CUTPA Violation, 270
  Allegations that the Defendant Knowingly Corrected a           Commencement of a Foreclosure Action Does Not
    Fuel Oil Leak Without Taking Steps to Prevent Migra-           Constitute an “Election of Remedies” Barring a Later
    tion of Escaped Contaminants to Neighboring Prop-              Action to Enforce a Guaranty Agreement, 270
    erty Are Sufficient to State Claims for Public and           Equitable Defenses of Laches, Breach of the Covenant
    Private Nuisance, Negligence, Statutory Violations             of Good Faith and Equitable Estoppel May Be As-
    and Reckless Misconduct, 150                                   serted by a Guarantor of a Mortgage Note, 270
  Enforcement Action Against an Otherwise Legal Activ-           Estoppel Does Not Apply to a Seven-year Delay in the
    ity by a Private Landowner Cannot Be Based on an               Enforcement of a Guaranty Agreement If the Guar-
    Impact on an Endangered Species Because the Con-               antor Failed to Make Any Effort to Determine the
    necticut Endangered Species Act Exempts Activities             Creditor’s Intentions, 270
    on Private Land, 85                                          Seven-year Delay in Enforcing a Guaranty Acquired
  Recoupment of Remediation Costs, Party Against                   Through a Bank Merger Does Not Bar Enforcement
    Whom a Claim for Remediation Has Been Asserted                 Because It Is Reasonable to Require Up to Five Years
    Has Standing to Seek Recovery from Other Respon-               to Process and Review Distress Loans Acquired in a
    sible Parties Even Before Any Determination as to the          Merger, 270
    Claimant’s Liability Has Been Made, 154                      Seven-year Delay in Enforcing a Guaranty Consti-
 Private Attorney General Act                                      tutes a Violation of the Covenant of Good Faith that
  Adequate Remedy and Irreparable Harm Are Not Re-                 Precludes Recovery of Interest After an Allowance of
    quired for a Statutory Action to Enjoin Environmental          a Reasonable Period for Enforcement, 270
    Contamination, 162                                           Waiver Based on a Delay in Commencing an Action
  In General, Affirmative Act by the Defendant Need Not            on a Guaranty Is Not a Valid Defense to a Guaranty
    Be Established for a Claim to Enjoin Environmental             Containing a “No Oral Waiver” Clause, 270
    Contamination, 162                                         Demand, Assignee Need Not Provide an Additional
  Misc. Cases, Municipality May Be Sued Under the                Demand Following an Assignment Which Occurs
    Statute for Failing to Take Zoning Enforcement Action        After the Presentment of an Original Demand, 270
    to Eliminate Environmental Contamination, 162
                                                             Notice of Default, Demand, Withdrawal of a Mortgage
  Statute Constitutes a Waiver of Sovereign Immunity,
                                                               Foreclosure Action Does Not Nullify the Effectiveness
    162
                                                               of a Previous Demand to Guarantors, 270
Equity
 Estoppel, Misc. Cases, Estoppel Does Not Apply to a        Habeas Corpus, Criminal Restraint
  Seven-year Delay in the Enforcement of a Guaranty          Grounds for Relief, Prison Inmate Has a Constitutionally
  Agreement If the Guarantor Failed to Make Any Effort         Protected Liberty Interest in a Sex Offender Classifica-
  to Determine the Creditor’s Intentions, 270                  tion and Therefore May Challenge the Commissioner’s
 Jurisdiction and Powers, Adequate Remedy and Irrepa-          Classification by a Writ of Habeas Corpus, 1
  rable Harm, Adequate Remedy and Irreparable Harm           Jurisdiction, Discharged Consecutive Sentence May Be
  Are Not Required for a Claim Based on the Violation of       Challenged If at Least One of the Other Sentences Has
  a Statute, 162                                               Not Yet Been Discharged, But Not a Discharged Con-
 Laches, Misc. Cases, Laches Does Not Apply to a Seven-        current Sentence, 123
  year Delay in Enforcing a Guaranty Acquired in a Bank      Limitations of Actions, No Statute of Limitations for a
  Merger Because It Is Reasonable to Require Up to Five        Habeas Petition, But the Jurisdictional Requirement of
  Years to Process and Review Distress Loans Acquired          Current Confinement on the Sentence Being Chal-
  in a Merger, 270                                             lenged Acts as a Limitations Period, 123
                        The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                                  36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1–8 (February 23, 2003)
Highways                                                           Subrogation, Misc. Cases
 Establishment, In General, Quitclaim Deed to a Munic-               Construction Contract Clause Imposing on a Property
   ipality of “All Right and Title and Interest” in the Streets       Owner an Obligation to Provide All-risk Insurance
   of a Subdivision Conveys the Fee Interest in the Roads,            Coverage and Mutually Waiving Claims Between the
   Not Merely an Easement, 129                                        Owner and Contractor for Property Damage Extends
 Liability for Defects                                                to Damage Caused by the Contractor’s Own Negli-
   Damages, Exception from the Statutory Prohibition of               gence, 72
     Apportionment on Any Basis Other than Negligence,               Recently Established Supreme Court Rule that a
     for Statutory Causes of Action that Are “Based on                Landlord’s Insurer May Not Recover in Subrogation
     Negligence,” Does Not Apply to Claims under the                  Against a Tenant in the Absence of an Express Sub-
     Defective Highway Act, 223                                       rogation Agreement Is Not Avoided by a Lease Clause
   Procedural Matters, Defective Highway Act Complaint                Providing that the Tenant Must Reimburse the Land-
     Must Contain a Specific Allegation that the Plaintiff            lord for Damages, 215
     Was Exercising Due Care at the Time of the Accident,          Uninsured Motorist Coverage
     144                                                             Election for Reduced Benefits, Strict Compliance with
Husband and Wife, Validity of Marriage, Prior Marriage                the Statutory Requirements for an Election for Re-
 Party Who Marries in Reliance on a Purported Divorce                 duced UIM Coverage Applies to Commercial Fleet
   Is Equitably Estopped from Later Challenging the Va-               Policies, 177
   lidity of the Divorce, 10                                         Procedural Matters
 Stranger to a Divorce Proceeding Has No Standing to                  Connecticut Law Applies to the Legality of an Exclu-
   Claim that the Divorce Was Invalid, Including One                    sion in an Uninsured Motorist Policy Issued in
   Party’s Later Spouse, 10                                             Florida to a Policyholder Who Primarily Resides in
Indians, Tribal Immunity, Misc. Cases, Tribe’s Waiver of                Connecticut with Respect to Claims from a Connect-
 Sovereign Immunity Contained in a Construction Con-                    icut Accident, 58
 tract Applies to Claims Under Exhibits Incorporated into             Passenger May Consolidate an Action in Tort Against
 the Agreement, 249                                                     a Motor Vehicle Operator with an Action in Contract
Injunctions, When It Lies                                               for UIM Coverage Against the Vehicle Insurer, 248
 Adequate Remedy at Law, Violation of a Statute May Be                Umbrella Insurer Has Standing to Bring a Declara-
   Enjoined Without Proof of Irreparable Harm or Lack of                tory Judgment Action to Determine Coverage Under
   an Adequate Remedy at Law, 90                                        an Insured’s Uninsured Motorist Policy, 58
 Irreparable Harm, Violation of a Statute May Be En-
   joined Without Proof of Irreparable Harm or Lack of an         Intoxicating Liquors, Regulation, Misc. Cases, Regula-
                                                                   tion of Wine Distribution Is Vested Exclusively with the
   Adequate Remedy at Law, 90
                                                                   Department of Consumer Protection; Therefore One
Insanity and Persons Non Compos Mentis, Department
                                                                   Wine Distributor Cannot Bring a Private Action Against
 of Mental Retardation, Procedural Matters, No Right to
                                                                   a Competing Distributor for Violating Regulations Con-
 Appeal Decision by the Department of Mental Retarda-
                                                                   cerning the Wholesale Pricing of Bulk Quantities of
 tion to Deny a Client’s Request for Emergency Status on
                                                                   Bottled Wine, 209
 the Waiting List for Group Home Placement, 50
Insurance                                                         Judgments
 Coverage                                                          Collateral Estoppel, Misc. Cases
   Covenant of Good Faith, Bill of Discovery May Be Used             Determinations in Unemployment Compensation Pro-
     to Obtain Access to an Insurer’s Claims File to Deter-           ceedings Have No Preclusive Effect in Other Proceed-
     mine Whether a Refusal to Engage in Negotiations                 ings, 41
     Constituted a Breach of the Covenant of Good Faith              Findings by a Court with Respect to Bifurcated Equi-
     with the Customer, 91                                            table Claims Are Not Entitled to Collateral Estoppel
   Duty to Defend, Insurer Who Initially Provides a De-               Effect with Respect to Companion Legal Claims Sub-
     fense for an Insured Is Not Estopped from Later                  ject to a Jury Trial, 95
     Withdrawing for Lack of Coverage, 61                          Foreign Judgments, Enforcement, Opinion Enforces a
   Homeowner’s Liability Coverage, Exception from the                Foreign Judgment Through the Unusual Procedure of
     Exclusion for Motor Vehicle Claims, for Off-road Re-            a “Motion for Summary Judgment in Lieu of a Com-
     creational Vehicles “Not Subject to Motor Vehicle               plaint,” 77
     Registration,” Applies to ATVs Even Though ATVs Are           Opening, Time Limit
     Subject to Specialized DMV Registration Require-                Assessment of Damages by a Panel of Judge Trial
     ments, 256                                                       Referees in an Eminent Domain Proceeding Consti-
   Illegal Conduct, Public Policy Precluding Coverage for             tutes a “Judgment” and Therefore Is Subject to the
     Injuries Caused by the Claimant’s Criminal Act Does              Four-month Time Limit for Opening a Judgment, 56
     Not Bar Coverage of Injuries While Operating a Stolen
                                                                     Challenge to a Government Agency’s Deduction of
     Vehicle, Because the Injury Is Caused by the Opera-
                                                                      Pending Taxes Against Damages Assessed in an Em-
     tion of the Vehicle Rather Than Its Theft, 256
                                                                      inent Domain Proceeding Is Subject to the Statutory
   Misc. Cases
                                                                      Four-month Time Limit for Opening a Judgment, 56
     Coverage for “Bodily Injury” Does Not Extend to Emo-
       tional Distress Unaccompanied by Physical Injury,           Summary Judgment, Misc. Cases, Opinion Enforces a
       61                                                            Foreign Judgment Through the Unusual Procedure of
     Whether the Property Owner or a Subcontractor Is                a “Motion for Summary Judgment in Lieu of a Com-
       Liable for the Self-insured “Retention” Exposure              plaint,” 77
       under an “Owner-controlled Project Liability Insur-        Jurisdiction, Longarm Jurisdiction, Transacting Busi-
       ance Policy” Presents an Issue of Fact Which Cannot         ness, Connecticut Longarm Jurisdiction Extends to For-
       Be Resolved on a Motion for Summary Judgment,               eign Members of a Closely Held Limited Partnership that
       225                                                         Holds Connecticut Real Estate as Its Principal Asset, 26
 Insurance Agents, Liabilities, Rule that CUTPA Does Not          Jury and Jurors, Misconduct, Racial Bias, Criminal De-
   Apply to “Professional Negligence” Does Not Extend to           fendant Claiming Juror Misconduct in the Form of
   Claims Against Insurance Agents, 181                            Racial Bias Must Prove Prejudice, 15
                       The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                                36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
Labor                                                          Limitations of Actions
 Collective Bargaining, Grievances                              Computation of Period
  Arbitration Clause of a Collective Bargaining Agree-           Accidental Failure of Suit Statute
    ment Between a Board of Education and Its Employ-              Action Incorrectly Commenced Against an Entity with
    e es Applies t o a Claim by E mployee s t o a                    No Legal Existence Can Be Saved Under the Acci-
    Proportionate Share of Stock Received Upon the Con-              dental Failure Statute Provided There Is a Close
    version of Its Medical Insurer Into a Stock Company,             Identity of Interest Between the Correctly and the
    Even Though the Town Rather than the Board Is the                Incorrectly Named Defendants, 20, 152
    Policy Holder and the Town Is Not a Party to the CBA,
    292                                                            Rule that the Statute Does Not Extend Contractual
                                                                     Limitations Periods, Including Those Statutorily
  Individual Union Member Lacks Standing to Bring an                 Mandated for Fire Insurance Policies, Applies Re-
    Action Against an Employer to Compel Arbitration                 gardless of the Reasons for the Dismissal of the
    Under a CBA, 188                                                 Earlier Action, 294
 State Board of Mediation and Arbitration, Procedural              Statute Cannot Be Relied Upon to Save an Improperly
  Matters, Police Union May Seek a Court Injunction                  Served Administrative Appeal, Including a Property
  While an Arbitration Is Pending Before the State Board             Tax Appeal, 107
  of Mediation and Arbitration, Even Though an Alter-
  nate Administrative Remedy May Also Be Available               Continuous Course of Conduct, Opinion Discusses
  from the State Board of Labor Relations, 192                     Whether a Limitations Period for a Claim Against an
                                                                   Aider and Abettor Is Tolled by a Continuous Course
Landlord and Tenant                                                of Conduct Engaged in by the Principal Tortfeasor
 In General, Licenses, Contract Authorizing the Use of a           After the Aider and Abettor’s Involvement Has
   Grade Crossing by the Owner of an Otherwise Land-               Ceased, 111
   locked Parcel Constitutes a License Rather Than Lease         Fraudulent Concealment
   and Therefore Is Terminable at the Will of the Railroad,        “Intent to Cause Delay” Element of a Claim of Fraud-
   305                                                               ulent Concealment Need Not Be Established by
 Liability for Dangerous Conditions                                  Direct Evidence; Circumstantial Evidence Is Suffi-
   Control, Landlord’s Retention of the Right to Review              cient, 111
     Modifications Proposed by the Tenant Does Not Im-             Normal Requirement for Proof of Affirmative Acts of
     pose Liability on the Landlord for Injuries to a Custo-         Concealment Does Not Apply to Claims Against a
     mer from a Fall Caused by a Defective Sidewalk at the           Fiduciary, 111
     Entrance to a Convenience Store, 263                        Relation Back
   Misc. Cases                                                     Amended Complaint Adding a Count Under the Newly
     No Cause of Action by Which a Property Owner Can                Recognized Common-law Cause of Action for Negli-
      Force a Neighboring Owner to Curtail Unruly Ten-               gent Service of Alcohol Relates Back to the Original
      ants, 210                                                      Complaint, But Not an Amendment Adding a Count
     Whether a Landlord Is Liable for a Dog Attack Inside            for Negligent Hiring and Supervision, 174
      a Tenant’s Apartment Presents an Issue of Fact               Relation Back Doctrine Applies to Loss of Consortium
      Which Cannot Be Resolved on a MSJ, 141                         Claims, 174
 Rights and Duties of Parties in General, Misc. Cases,           Wrong Defendant Statute
   Recently Established Supreme Court Rule that a                  Statute Saves an Action Incorrectly Commenced
   Landlord’s Insurer May Not Recover in Subrogation                 Against the Canaan School Board Rather than the
   Against a Tenant in the Absence of an Express Subro-              North Canaan School Board, 13
   gation Agreement Is Not Avoided by a Lease Clause
                                                                   Statute Saves an Action Which Incorrectly Identifies
   Providing that the Tenant Must Reimburse the Land-
                                                                     the Capacity of a School Superintendent Serving in
   lord for Damages, 215
                                                                     the Dual Capacity of Superintendent for Two Differ-
Liens                                                                ent School Systems, 13
 Enforcement, Procedural Matters, Findings by a Court           Particular Matters
  with Respect to Bifurcated Equitable Claims Are Not            Child Support, Twenty-seven-year-old Child Support
  Entitled to Collateral Estoppel Effect with Respect to           Obligation Is Not Barred by a Statute of Limitations,
  Companion Legal Claims Subject to a Jury Trial, 95               Laches or Equitable Estoppel Defense, But Is Barred
 Judgment Liens, Procedural Matters                                by Waiver, 179
  Certificate of Judgment Lien Need Not Identify Co-own-         Providing Alcohol, Amended Complaint Adding a Count
   ers Not Obligated Under the Judgment, 288                       Under the Newly Recognized Common-law Cause of
  Failure to Comply with the Statutory Requirement for             Action for Negligent Service of Alcohol Relates Back
   the Preservation of a PJR Attachment, that a Certifi-           to the Original Complaint, But Not an Amendment
   cate of Judgment Lien Be Filed Within Four Months               Adding a Count for Negligent Hiring and Supervision,
   of Judgment, Causes a Loss of Priority with Respect             174
   to Intervening Lienholders But Does Not Invalidate          Marriage Dissolution
   the PJR Attachment with Respect to the Claim
   Against the Creditor, 288                                    Alimony, Modification
  Requirement that a Certificate of Judgment Lien In-            Alimony Modifiable as to Amount But Not Duration
   clude a Description of the Property Is Satisfied by a           Other Than to Terminate Upon Remarriage Is Modi-
   Street Address, 288                                             fiable Upon the Recipient’s Cohabitation, 67
 Real Estate Broker’s Lien, Procedural Matters, Findings         Clause Providing for Alimony for a Fixed Period with
  by a Court with Respect to Bifurcated Equitable Claims           the Parties to Mutually Agree on an Adjusted Amount
  Are Not Entitled to Collateral Estoppel Effect with              at the Expiration of the Period Is Subject to Court-or-
  Respect to Companion Legal Claims Subject to a Jury              dered Modification If the Parties Are Unable to Agree,
  Trial, 95                                                        201
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                              36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1–8 (February 23, 2003)
 Child Custody                                              Partnerships, Limited Partnerships, Actions, Connecti-
   Jurisdiction, Connecticut Should Decline Jurisdiction     cut Longarm Jurisdiction Extends to Foreign Members
    Over a Postjudgment Motion to Modify Custody of          of a Closely Held Limited Partnership that Holds Con-
    Children Who for the Past Eight Years Have Resided,      necticut Real Estate as Its Principal Asset, 26
    Attended School and Received Medical Care in New        Pensions and Other Employee Benefit Plans, Retire-
    York, 136
                                                             ment Benefits, Misc. Cases, Spouse Entitled Under a
   Relocation, Custodial Parent Is Permitted to Relocate
    to Japan for a Three-year Job Assignment, 224            Dissolution Judgment to 50% of the Other Spouse’s
 Child Support                                               Pension Is Not Entitled to Share in Cost of Living Adjust-
   Gross Income, “Gross Income” for a Parent in Active       ments, 161
    Military Service Includes Regularly Received Para-      Physicians and Surgeons, Peer Review Organizations,
    chute “Jump Pay” But Not a “Basic Subsistence            Privileged Information
    Allowance” or a “Family Separation Allowance,” 217
   Misc. Cases, Twenty-seven-year-old Child Support Ob-      Privilege Is Waived by Placing a Document in the Subject
    ligation Is Not Barred by a Statute of Limitations,        Patient’s Medical File, 52
    Laches or Equitable Estoppel Defense, But Is Barred      Statutory Privilege May Be Waived, 52
    by Waiver, 179                                          Pleadings
 Jurisdiction
   Forum Non Conveniens, Connecticut Is Not an Incon-        Motion to Strike, In General, Motion to Strike May Be
    venient Forum for a Dissolution Action Between a           Used to Challenge an Entire Count as to Only One of
    Connecticut and a New York City Resident Where the         Multiple Defendants, 39
    Only Issue Is the Dissolution of Their Marriage, 229     Offer of Judgment, Recovered Damages, Damages for
   Misc. Cases, Non-resident Spouse Has the Burden of          Purposes of Determining Eligibility for Relief Under the
    Proving that a New Resident of This State Does Not         Offer of Judgment Statute Includes Costs Only If Ex-
    Have a Present Intention of Remaining Here for the         pressly Authorized as Part of a Specific Relief Estab-
    Full 12-month Residency Jurisdictional Period, 229
                                                               lished by Statute, 4
 Property Distribution
   Antenuptial Agreements, Disclosure of Income Re-         Prejudgment Remedies, Attachments, Procedural Mat-
    quired by the Premarital Agreement Act to Validate a     ters
    Premarital Agreement Need Not be in Writing, 32          Failure to Comply with the Statutory Requirement for
   Pensions, Spouse Entitled to 50% of the Other Spouse’s      the Preservation of a PJR Attachment, that a Certificate
    Pension Is Not Entitled to Share in Cost of Living         of Judgment Lien Be Filed Within Four Months of
    Adjustments, 161                                           Judgment, Causes a Loss of Priority with Respect to
Master and Servant                                             Intervening Lienholders But Does Not Invalidate the
 Employment Termination Claims, Misc. Cases                    PJR Attachment with Respect to the Claim Against the
   Termination Letter Falsely Stating that an Employee         Creditor, 288
    Was Being Terminated for Dishonesty Is Not Suffi-
    ciently “Extreme or Outrageous” to Support a Claim       In General, PJR Application May Be Served Along with
    of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, 41        the Original Writ, Summons and Complaint; There Is
   Written Statement of the Reason for an Employee’s           No Requirement that the Application Either Precede or
    Discharge Contained in a Termination Notice Is Ab-         Follow the Commencement of the Action Through Ser-
    solutely Privileged, 41                                    vice of the Original Process, 262
 Master’s Liability to Third Persons, Course of Employ-     Probate Court, Appeal from Probate
   ment, Whether a Sexual Assault by a Hospital Atten-
   dant Occurred in the Course of Employment Presents        Jurisdiction, Commissioner of Revenue Services Is Au-
   an Issue of Fact Which Cannot Be Resolved on a MSJ,         tomatically a Party to an Appeal from a Probate Court
   138                                                         Decision Approving a DRS Computation of Estate
 Wages, Wage Collection Statute                                Taxes, 35
   Bonus Paid Pursuant to an Employment Agreement            Time Limit
    Constitutes “Wages” for Which Double Damages May           Estate Executor Loses the Benefit of the Two-year Time
    Be Recovered, 79                                             Limit for Seeking a Refund Based on a DRS Tax
   “Civil Action” as Used in the Statute Authorizing Dou-        Computation Error by Filing a Petition for Review by
    ble Damages for an Employee Prevailing in a Civil
                                                                 the Probate Court Because Probate Rulings Are Sub-
    Action for Wages Includes an Arbitration Proceeding,
    79                                                           ject to a 30-day Appeal Period, 35
   Double Damages Under the Wage Collection Statute            Thirty-day Time Limit for Filing an Appeal from Probate
    Constitute Remedial Rather Than Punitive Damages             Commences on the Date of the Probate Court Deci-
    and Therefore Are Not Subject to a Clause in an              sion (Not on the Date that the Probate Court Grants
    Arbitration Award Prohibiting Any Award of “Special,         Permission to Appeal); However, an Appeal Is Timely
    Exemplary or Punitive Damages,” 79                           If Probate Permission Is Granted Within the 30-day
Mortgages, Mortgage Foreclosure, Defenses, Banks’ Fail-          Period—Filing the Appeal in Court Within the Period
 ure to Comply with the Customary Practice of Commenc-           Is Not Required, 143
 ing Suit to Enforce a Mortgage Within 4 Months                Thirty-day Time Limit for Filing an Appeal from Probate
 Following Demand Does Not Constitute a CUTPA Viola-             Commences on the Date of the Probate Court Deci-
 tion, 270
                                                                 sion, Not on the Later Date that the Probate Court
Parties, Use of Fictitious Names, In General, Criminal           Grants a Motion Seeking Permission to Appeal, 35
 Statute Requiring that the Identity of Sexual Assault
 Victims Be Kept Confidential Establishes a Public Policy   Process, Defects, Circumstantial Defects Statute, Failure
 Justifying Permitting a Civil Suit for Sexual Assault to    to Include a Return Date in an Apportionment Com-
 Identify the Plaintiff Through the Use of a Fictitious      plaint May Be Cured by Amendment Pursuant to the
 Name, 101                                                   Circumstantial Defects Statute, 75
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                               36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
Real Property                                                 Taxation
 Adverse Possession, In General, Statute Precluding the        Local Property Tax, Assessment Appeals, Statutory
   Acquisition Through Adverse Possession of Property           Right to Join an Appeal from Subsequent Assessments
   Owned by a Railroad Applies to Claims for Easement           with a Pending Assessment Appeal Applies Even
   by Necessity as well as Easements by Prescription, 305       Though an Intervening Town-wide Reassessment Has
 Interests in Land, Executory Agreements, Statute Pro-          Occurred, 199
   hibiting the Enforcement of Executor Agreements for         Property Tax, Appeals, Accidental Failure of Suit Statute
   the Sale of Real Property Beyond One Year Does Not           Cannot Be Relied Upon to Save an Improperly Served
   Bar an Option Holder from Enforcing Against the              Administrative Appeal, Including a Property Tax Ap-
   Grantor Oral Agreements to Extend the Option Period,         peal, 107
   246                                                        Taxes, Estate Taxes, Refunds, Estate Executor Loses the
 Option to Purchase, In General, Statute Prohibiting the       Benefit of the Two-year Time Limit for Seeking a Refund
   Enforcement of Options Beyond One Year Does Not Bar         Based on a DRS Tax Computation Error by Filing a
   an Option Holder from Enforcing Against the Grantor         Petition for Review by the Probate Court Because Probate
   Oral Agreements to Extend the Option Period, 246            Rulings Are Subject to a 30-day Appeal Period, 35
Sales, Products Liability Act, Procedural Matters, Third-     Torts
 party Complaint for Common-law Indemnification
                                                               Animals
 Against a Tortfeasor Not Originally Sued by the Plaintiff
 Is Subject to Dismissal If a Direct Claim Is Subsequently      Dog Bite Statute, Court Awards $80 Economic and
 Asserted Against the Impleaded Party, 221                        $1500 Noneconomic Damages for a Moderately Seri-
                                                                  ous Dog Bite Wound to the Arm, 153
Schools and School Districts, Athletic Conferences,
                                                                Dogs, Whether a Landlord Is Liable for a Dog Attack
 Connecticut Association of Schools, Connecticut Asso-
                                                                  Inside a Tenant’s Apartment Presents an Issue of Fact
 ciation of Schools Has No Duty with Respect to the Safety
                                                                  Which Cannot Be Resolved on a MSJ, 141
 of Athletic Facilities Used for Regular Season Athletic
 Events, 265                                                   Child Abduction, Procedural Matters, Warsaw Conven-
                                                                tion Bars Common-law Claims of Infliction of Emo-
Social Services
                                                                tional Distress Incurred by Two Children During an
 Department of Children and Families, Mandatory Child           International Abduction by a Parent, 69
   Abuse Reporting
                                                               Contribution and Apportionment
   Finding of Child Abuse Requires a Finding of Inten-
     tional Conduct, 7                                          In General, Apportionment Complaint May Be Based
                                                                  Only on Conduct for Which the Apportionment De-
   Reflexively Slapping a Child in Reaction to a Provoca-
                                                                  fendant Could Be Directly Liable to the First-party
     tion Does Not Constitute “Child Abuse,” 7
                                                                  Plaintiff, 110
   Slap that Leaves a Temporary Red Mark But No Phys-
     ical Bruise Does Not Constitute a “Physical Injury” as     Procedural Matters, 120-day Limitation Period for Fil-
                                                                  ing an Apportionment Complaint Is Mandatory, 297
     Used in the Definition of “Child Abuse,” 7
 Medicaid, Eligible Services, Department of Social Ser-        Damages
   vices, When Considering an Application for Orthodon-         Collateral Source Benefits
   tic Services Pursuant to the “Early Screening,                 Mandatory PIP Benefits Paid Pursuant to a Mass.
   Diagnosis and Treatment” Program for Persons Under               Motor Vehicle Insurance Policy Are Not Deductible
   21 Years of Age, Must Consider, in Addition to the               from Damages as a Collateral Source Benefit, 34
   Department’s Objective Standard for Evaluating the             Plaintiff’s Offset for the Cost of Health Insurance,
   Need for Orthodontic Services, the Subjective Standard           Against a Defendant’s Collateral Source Deduction,
   Required by Federal Regulation for All Requests Under            Includes Employer-paid Premiums, 214
   the Program: Whether Treatment Is Required to Cor-           Contribution and Apportionment
   rect or Ameliorate a Physical Defect, 237                      Exception from the Statutory Prohibition of Appor-
 Title XIX, Eligibility, Trust Fund Established from an             tionment on Any Basis Other than Negligence, for
   Accident Victim’s Settlement Fund May Not Include                Statutory Causes that Are “Based on Negligence,”
   Spendthrift Provisions that Go Beyond the Federally-             Does Not Apply to Claims under the Defective High-
   permitted Provisions Designed to Preserve Eligibility            way Act, 223
   for Title XIX Medical Benefits, 202                            Failure to Include a Return Date in an Apportionment
Sovereign Immunity                                                  Complaint May Be Cured by Amendment Pursuant
 Exceptions, Imminent Harm to an Identifiable Victim,               to the Circumstantial Defects Statute, 75
   Exception Applies to Claims for Injuries from a Fall on        Time Limit for Filing an Apportionment Complaint Is
   Ice by a Volunteer Working for a Charitable Organiza-            Directory and Therefore May Be Waived, 75
   tion at a Used Clothing Drop Located in a Town Hall          Economic Loss Doctrine, Economic Loss Doctrine,
   Parking Lot, 254                                               Which Bars Recovery in Tort for Economic Loss in the
 In General, Misc. Cases, Statute Authorizing Municipal           Absence of a Direct Contractual Relationship, Has
   Ordinances that Shift Liability for Failure to Remove          Not Been Adopted in Connecticut, 99
   Ice and Snow to Abutting Property Owners Does Not           Defamation, Privileges, Written Statement of the Reason
   Apply to Property Owned by the State, 284                    for an Employee’s Discharge Contained in a Termina-
Statute of Frauds, Agreement Respecting Real Estate,            tion Notice Is Absolutely Privileged, 41
 Interest in Land, Agreement to Refrain from Increasing        Duty of Owner of Property
 the Enrollment of a Private School, Made to Induce             Misc. Cases, Whether a Landlord Is Liable for a Dog
 Neighborhood Support for a Proposed Zoning Applica-              Attack Inside a Tenant’s Apartment Presents an Issue
 tion, Is Subject to the Statute of Frauds and Therefore          of Fact Which Cannot Be Resolved on a MSJ, 141
 Unenforceable If Not in Writing, 45                            Sidewalks, Abutting Owner’s Removal of Snow and Ice
Superior Court, Mandatory Arbitration Program, De-                Does Not Alter the Rule that Abutting Owners Are Not
 mand for Trial De Novo, Otherwise Premature Demand               Liable in Tort for a Fall on a Sidewalk Caused by Snow
 Filed After a Court Has Denied an Objection to an Award          Accumulated During a Storm; the Owner Is Liable
 and Scheduled a Fixed Trial Date But Before the                  Only for Injuries Caused by an Increased Hazard
 Referee’s Written Report Has Been Mailed, Is Valid, 297          Created by the Owner’s Efforts, 33
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                               36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1–8 (February 23, 2003)
Fraud and Misrepresentation, In General, Residential             Misc. Cases
  Condition Disclosure Act Creates a Private Cause of              Allegations that the Defendant Knowingly Corrected
  Action, But Only for Intentional Misrepresentations,               a Fuel Oil Leak Without Taking Steps to Prevent
  147                                                                Migration of Escaped Contaminants to Neighboring
Infliction of Emotional Distress                                     Property Are Sufficient to State Claims for Public
  Bystander Emotional Distress, Parent Cannot Recover                and Private Nuisance, Negligence, Statutory Viola-
    for Emotional Distress Resulting from Witnessing a               tions and Reckless Misconduct, 150
    Child’s Consumption of Expressed Breast Milk from              Warsaw Convention Preempts Local Causes of Action
    a Bottle Provided by the Mother of Another Child, 207            Against an International Airline Regardless of
  Extreme and Outrageous Conduct                                     Whether Comparable Relief Is Available Under the
    Expulsion of a Member of a Voluntary Association Is              Convention, 69
      Not Sufficiently “Extreme and Outrageous” to Sup-          Sports Injuries, Supreme Court Holding that a Partic-
      port a Claim of Intentional Infliction of Emotional          ipant Injured While Engaged in a Competitive Contact
      Distress, No Matter How Unfair, 23                           Sport Cannot Recover in Negligence Does Not Apply
    “Extreme and Outrageous” Element of a Claim for                to a Claim for Injuries When Kicked During an Ad-
      Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Is Satis-       vanced Jazz Dance Class, 259
      fied by Proof that an Employer Framed an Employee         Nuisance, Misc. Cases, No Cause of Action by Which a
      for Theft as Justification for a Termination, 279          Property Owner Can Force a Neighboring Owner to
    Termination Letter Falsely Stating that an Employee          Curtail Unruly Tenants, 210
      Was Being Terminated for Dishonesty Is Not Suffi-         Providing Alcohol
      ciently “Extreme or Outrageous” to Support a Claim         Dram Shop Act
      of Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress, 41          Assumption of Risk and “Participation” Are Not Valid
Invasion of Privacy                                                  Special Defenses to a Statutory Claim Against a
  In General, Internet Communications Are Subject to a               Tavern Owner Under the Dram Shop Act, 85
    Qualified Constitutional Right to Privacy, 170                 2003 Public Act Increasing the Limits of Liability for
  Procedural Matters, Bill of Discovery May Be Used to               Personal Injury Claims Under the Dram Shop Act
    Require that an Internet Provider Disclose the Iden-             from $20,000 to $250,000 Is Not Retroactive to
    tity of the Author of an Allegedly Defamatory Email,             Actions Pending on the Effective Date, 281
    170                                                          In General
Liability of Owner of Land, Sidewalks, Statute Authoriz-           Public Act Eliminating Liability Under the Recently
  ing Municipal Ordinances that Shift Liability for Fail-            Recognized Common-law Cause of Action for Pro-
  ure to Remove Ice and Snow to Abutting Property                    viding Alcohol to an Intoxicated Person, for Sellers
  Owners Does Not Apply to Property Owned by the State,              of Alcohol to Persons Older than the Legal Drinking
  284                                                                Age, Is Not Retroactive, 148
Libel and Defamation                                               2003 Supreme Court Holding Recognizing a Com-
  Misc. Cases, Defamation Claim Against a Youth Sports               mon-law Cause of Action for Negligent Service of
    Organization Cannot Be Based on Providing Notice to              Alcohol Is Retroactive, 174
    the Police and a Related Regional Organization that          Limitations of Actions, Amended Complaint Adding a
    a Former Member Had Been Banned from Attending                 Count Under the Newly Recognized Common-law
    Organization Functions, 23                                     Cause of Action for Negligent Service of Alcohol Re-
  Privileges, Qualified Privilege for Statements on a Mat-         lates Back to the Original Complaint, But Not an
    ter of Public Concern Bars Libel Claims Against In-            Amendment Adding a Count for Negligent Hiring and
    town Tow-truck Operators for Petitioning a Local               Supervision, 174
    Police Department to Have an Out-of-town Operator           Right to Recover
    Removed from the Department’s List of Approved Tow           Aiding and Abetting, Opinion Discusses Whether a
    Operators, 144                                                 Limitations Period for a Claim Against an Aider and
Medical Malpractice, Misc. Cases, Improper Use of a                Abettor Is Tolled by a Continuous Course of Conduct
  Position by a Medical Provider to Develop a Sexual               Engaged in by the Principal Tortfeasor After the Aider
  Relationship with a Patient Is Not Actionable as Medi-           and Abettor’s Involvement Has Ceased, 111
  cal Malpractice Unless the Conduct Is Substantially            Conspiracy, Connecticut Recognizes “Civil Conspiracy”
  Related to Medical Diagnosis or Treatment, 138                   as an Independent Cause of Action, 261
Misrepresentation and Fraud, Misc. Cases, Seller of Real         Loss of Consortium, Relation Back Doctrine Applies to
  Estate Has No Duty to Disclose to a Buyer Amounts                Loss of Consortium Claims, 174
  Offered by the Government in Preliminary Negotiations         Vexatious Litigation, Probable Cause, Probable Cause Is
  Concerning a Possible Eminent Domain Taking, at                Not Established, in an Action Based on Bringing a
  Least Where the Buyer Is Aware of the Possible Taking,         Time-barred Claim, by the Litigant’s Belief that the
  268                                                            Limitations Period Could Be Extended Through Legis-
Negligence                                                       lative Action While the Civil Action Was Pending, 111
  Duty                                                         Trade Regulation
    Connecticut Association of Schools Has No Duty with         Connecticut Anti-Trust Act, Defenses, Federal Noerr-
      Respect to the Safety of Athletic Facilities Used for      Pennington Doctrine Applies to Claims Under the Con-
      Regular Season Athletic Events, 265                        necticut Anti-Trust Act, 144
    Property Owner Has a Duty to Disclose Existing              Unfair Insurance Practices Act
      Environmental Contamination to a Party Con-                General Business Practice, Proof of a General Business
      tracted to Perform Site Work, 154                            Practice Is Required Only for Unfair Settlement Prac-
    Subcontractor Hired to Haul Hazardous Waste from               tice Claims Based on Misrepresentations Concerning
      a Construction Site Owes a Duty to Use Due Care              Coverage, 181
      in Selecting a Proper Disposal Site, 154                   Unfair Sales Practices, Claim for Making a False Rep-
  Indemnification, Indemnification May Not Be Obtained             resentation for the Purpose of Obtaining a Commis-
    from a Group of Defendants No One of Which Is in               s ion Re quire s Proof of an In tent ional
    Exclusive Control of the Underlying Situation, 154             Misrepresentation, 181
                      The Connecticut Law Reporter Cumulative Index and Tables
                               36 CONN. L. RPTR. NOS. 1– 8 (February 23, 2003)
 Unfair Trade Practices Act                                   Membership, Expulsion
   Damages, Opinion Awards 7 Times Actual Damages on            Defamation Claim Against a Youth Sports Organization
     a CUTPA Claim Based on a Used Car Dealer’s Refusal           Cannot Be Based on Providing Notice to the Police and
     to Honor an Agreement to Exchange the Vehicle If the         a Related Regional Organization that a Former Mem-
     Purchaser Was Not “Completely Satisfied,” 87                 ber Had Been Banned from Attending Organization
   In General, CUTPA Claim Can Be Based on a Single               Functions, 23
     Incident; a General Business Practice Need Not Be
     Proven, 87                                                 Expulsion of a Member of a Voluntary Association Is
   Misc. Cases, Used Car Dealership’s Agreement to Re-            Not Sufficiently “Extreme and Outrageous” to Sup-
     place a Vehicle If a Customer Is Not “Completely             port a Claim of Intentional Infliction of Emotional
     Satisfied” Must Be Honored Even If the Customer’s            Distress, No Matter How Unfair, 23
     Dissatisfaction Is Unreasonable, 87                        Statute Requiring Fair Rules Governing the Admission
   Trade or Commerce                                              and Expulsion of Members Does Not Create a Right
     Rule that a CUTPA Claim Against a Physician Can Be           to Monetary Damages, 23
       Based Only on the Entrepreneurial Aspects of the
                                                             Workers’ Compensation, Amount and Period of Compen-
       Medical Profession Is Not Avoided by Allegations of
       an Improper Use of an Experimental Drug Not            sation, Misc. Cases, Municipal Ordinance Requiring the
       Approved by the FDA and Not Recognized as a            Offset of Workers’ Compensation Benefits Against Re-
       Traditional Form of Treatment, 166                     tirement Benefits Does Not Apply to Pension Benefits
     Rule that CUTPA Does Not Apply to “Professional          Paid Pursuant to an Early Retirement Plan, 169
       Negligence” Does Not Extend to Claims Against         Zoning
       Insurance Agents, 181
Trusts                                                        Appeal to Courts, Exhaustion of Remedies, Intervenor’s
 Appointment, Acceptance and Removal of Trustee, Best          Failure to Present Evidence in Opposition to a Site Plan
   Interest of the Beneficiaries, “Best Interests of the       Application After Being Denied a Request for a Public
   Beneficiaries” as a Statutory Grounds for Removing a        Hearing Does Not Constitute a Failure to Exhaust
   Trustee Need Not Be Based Solely on the Terms of the        Remedies, 239
   Trust; Trustee May Be Removed Based Solely on the          Nonconforming Uses and Structures, In General, Zoning
   Unanimous Preference of the Beneficiaries, 133              Commission May Not Require the Elimination of a
 Control and Management of Property, Suits by and              Legal Nonconformity as a Condition for the Approval of
   Against Trustee, Action Incorrectly Commenced Against
                                                               a Subdivision Application, 93
   a Trust Rather than the Trust’s Trustee Can Be Saved
   Under the Accidental Failure of Suit Statute, 20           Procedural Matters, Notice of Public Hearing, Statutory
 Spendthrift Trusts, Misc. Cases, Trust Fund Established       Notice of a Proposal to Create a New Zone Must Include
   from an Accident Victim’s Settlement Fund May Not           a Description of the Properties to Which the Zone Will
   Include Spendthrift Provisions that Go Beyond the           Apply, 63
   Federally-permitted Provisions Designed to Preserve        Procedure Before Agency, Site Plan Applications
   Eligibility for Title XIX Medical Benefits, 202             Intervenor’s Failure to Present Evidence in Opposition
Unemployment Compensation, Procedural Matters,
                                                                 to a Site Plan Application After Being Denied a Re-
 Misc. Cases
 Determinations in Unemployment Compensation Proceed-            quest for a Public Hearing Does Not Constitute a
   ings Have No Preclusive Effect in Other Proceedings, 41       Failure to Exhaust Remedies, 239
 Statutory Requirement for a Statement of the Grounds          Windham Zoning Commission Has Been Granted Reg-
   for Review Is Mandatory, 219                                  ulatory Authority to Consider Environmental Issues
Vendor and Purchaser, Fraud and Mistake, Residential             When Rendering a Decision on a Site Plan Applica-
 Condition Disclosure Act, Residential Condition Disclo-         tion, 239
 sure Act Creates a Private Cause of Action, But Only for      Zoning Commission May Consider Environmental Is-
 Intentional Misrepresentations, 147                             sues When Rendering a Decision on a Site Plan
Voluntary Associations                                           Application, But Only If Authorized by the Local
 Liabilities, Volunteer Immunity Statutes                        Ordinance, 239
   Federal Volunteer Protection Act Protects Individual
     Members But Not an Organization Itself, 23               Subdivisions, Misc. Cases, Zoning Commission May Not
   State Volunteer Immunity Statute Limits Its Protection      Require the Elimination of a Legal Nonconformity as a
     to Nonprofit Organizations that Have Been Formally        Condition for the Approval of a Subdivision Applica-
     Qualified by IRS as a Tax-exempt Entity, 23               tion, 93

								
To top