181 Conn. App. 703 - State v. Abraham’s Empirical Analysis
2018
Citation profile
14 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wright v. Commissioner of Correction · 169 Conn. App. 56 - State v. Estrella J.C. · 108 Conn. App. 435 - State v. Telford · 113 Conn. App. 63 - State v. DONALD M. · Mejia v. Commissioner of Correction
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]he statements of a declarant may be admissible under the medical treatment exception if made in circumstances from which it reasonably may be inferred that the declarant understands that the interview has a medical purpose. Statements of others, including the interviewers, may be relevant to show the circumstances.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The legal principles relating to the medical treatment exception are well settled. Admissibility of out-of-court statements made by a patient to a medical care provider depends on whether the statements were made for the purposes of obtaining medical diagnosis or treatment ... and on whether the declarant's statements reasonably were related to achieving those ends.... The term medical encompasses psychological as well as somatic illnesses and conditions.... Furthermore, statements made by a sexual assault complainant to a social worker may fall within the exception if the social worker is found to have been acting within the chain of medical care.... "[S]tatements may be reasonably pertinent ... to obtaining medical diagnosis or treatment even when that was not the primary purpose of the inquiry that prompted them, or the principal motivation behind their expression.... Although [t]he medical treatment exception to the hearsay rule requires that the statements be both pertinent to treatment and motivated by a desire for treatment ... in cases involving juveniles, [we] have permitted this requirement to be satisfied inferentially.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[S]tatements may be reasonably pertinent ... to obtaining medical diagnosis or treatment even when that was not the primary purpose of the inquiry that prompted them, or the principal motivation behind their expression.... Although [t]he medical treatment exception to the hearsay rule requires that the statements be both pertinent to treatment and motivated by a desire for treatment ... in cases involving juveniles, [we] have permitted this requirement to be satisfied inferentially.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.