41 Conn. Super. Ct. 66 - Burns v. Barrett’s Empirical Analysis
1988
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 23 U.S.C. § 131
Relies on Cleveland Board of Education v. Loudermill · Central Hudson Gas Electric Corporation v. Public Service Commission of New York · Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc. · Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent · Clark v. Community for Creative Non-Violence
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[w]hen a statute and state regulations have been violated, a plaintiff seeking an injunction is relieved of the burden of alleging and CT Page 1901-i proving irreparable harm and no adequate remedy at law under the rationale that the enactment of the statute by implication assumes that no adequate alternative remedy exists and that the injury was irreparable, that is, the legislation was needed or else it would not have been enacted.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.