Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 200 CONN 406 - Glanz v. Testa

Glanz v. Testa’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

23
cited by 23 later decisions
1
states following
July 2022
most recently cited

2 district · 21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently July 2022

2 district · 21 state decisions

8019861990200020102020decided

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 Ledgebrook Condominium Assn., Inc. v. Lusk Corporation · Fermont Division v. Smith · Kukanskis v. Griffith · 1 Conn. App. 188 - Self-Service Sales Corp. v. Heinz · 1 Conn. App. 349 - Lengyel & Lengyel Builders, Inc. v. Hill

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

  1. “(A) neither resides in nor maintains an office or place of business in this state and is not otherwise subject to jurisdiction over his person by the court, or (B) has hidden or will hide himself so that process cannot be served on him or (C) is about to remove himself or his property from this state or (D) is about to fraudulently dispose of or has fraudulently disposed of any of his property with intent to hinder, delay or defraud his creditors or (E) has fraudulently hidden or withheld money, property or effects which should be liable to the satisfaction of his debts or (F) has stated he is insolvent or has stated he is unable to pay his debts as they mature.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Even if a court erred in granting an ex parte real estate attachment because of a defective affidavit, the plaintiff may still prove probable cause at a hearing to dissolve or modify the attachment.”
    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.