1 Conn. App. 17 - Urrata v. Izzillo’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently August 2002
24 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Schlesinger v. State of Wisconsin · Maloney v. Pac · O'LEARY v. McGuinness · Hartford Kosher Caterers, Inc. v. Gazda · Merrimac Associates, Inc. v. DiSesa
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The requirement that, in order to establish aggrievement, the interest which is adversely affected be `direct' is of long-standing and unbroken lineage. See Maloney v. Pac , 183 Conn. 313 , 321 , 439 A.2d 349 (1981); Beard's Appeal , 64 Conn. 526 , 533 , 30 A. 775 (1894).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“If the will were set aside, the plaintiff would not directly take any part of the estate. Any rights she claims are not rights in the estate itself; her interest derives strictly through a third person. Under these circumstances, she is not aggrieved.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.