Targonski v. Clebowicz’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 state decisions

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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “'a continuing duty must rest on the factual bedrock of actual knowledge' "). 11 * Such a duty will continue only as long as there remains an opportunity to cure, or at least mitigate, the injury from the initial breach that gave rise to the cause of action. See Targonski v. Clebowicz , 142 Conn. App. 97 , 110, 63 A.3d 1001 (2013) ("[E]ven after an attorney's representation of a client ends, he owes a duty to his client, which relates back to his original wrong of rendering negligent services to the client, to correct the results of such prior negligence if he later learns of the negligence at a time when he has the power to remedy the problems arising from it.... By force of simple logic, this duty continues until such time as he takes action to cure his prior negligence or the opportunity to cure such prior negligence ceases to exist.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 167 Conn. App. 691 - Straw Pond Associates, LLC v. Fitzpatrick, Mariano & Santos, P.C. · Essex Ins. Co. v. William Kramer & Associates, LLC

2. “In sum, [i]n deciding whether the trial court properly granted the defendant's motion for summary judgment, we must determine if there is a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether the defendant: (1) committed an initial wrong upon the plaintiff; (2) owed a continuing duty to the plaintiff that was related to the alleged original wrong; and (3) continually breached that duty.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 169 Conn. App. 21 - Vaccaro v. Shell Beach Condominium, Inc. · 185 Conn. App. 627 - Chamerda v. Opie

3. “The question of whether a party's claim is barred by the statute of limitations is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 168 Conn. App. 354 - Doe v. Town of W. Hartford · 167 Conn. App. 691 - Straw Pond Associates, LLC v. Fitzpatrick, Mariano & Santos, P.C.