Sullivan v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 112 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 118 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[i]t is a cardinal principle of judicial review that when an adequate administrative remedy is provided by law, it should be exhausted.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Toomey v. Reider, No. 96 134029 (Feb. 21, 1997) · 2000 Conn. Super. Ct. 4889 - Martin v. Brady, No. Cv 99-090204 (Apr. 25, 2000)

2. ““(a) Notwithstanding the failure to file a proper notice of a claim against the state of Connecticut with the clerk of the office of the claims commissioner, as required by section 4-147 of the general statutes, within the time specified by section 4-148 of the general statutes, and notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (b) of section 4-148 of the general statutes barring the presentment of a claim once considered by the claims commissioner, by the general assembly or in a judicial proceeding, Ludmil Chotkowski is authorized to present his claim against the state to the claims commissioner, provided he files a notice of such claim with the clerk of the office of tire claims commissioner in accordance with section 4-147 not later than October 1, 1991. “(b) The general assembly finds that: In 1975 Ludmil Chotkowski was employed by the state as a physician at the Rocky Hill Veterans’ Home and Hospital; that in 1975 he received notice that Iris job title would be changed and his salary would be reduced; that Ludmil Chotkowski in a letter dated May 20, 1975 wrote to the department of personnel and administration to request the ‘opportunity of appealing this decision before it should become final’; that the commissioner of personnel and administration advised Ludmil Chotkowsld in a letter dated June 3, 1975 that ‘there is no existing statute or regulation which would permit such an appeal, either to me or any other appropriate body’; that subsequently in 1975 Ludmil Chotkows”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Chotkowski v. State

3. “Simply bringing a constitutional challenge to an agency's actions will not necessarily excuse a failure to follow an available statutory appeal process. Direct adjudication even of constitutional claims is not warranted when the relief sought by a litigant might conceivably have been obtained through an alternative statutory procedure which the litigant has chosen to ignore.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Toomey v. Reider, No. 96 134029 (Feb. 21, 1997)