84 Conn. App. 535 - Allison v. Manetta’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district · 11 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “On this set of facts, we conclude, as a matter of law, that [the defendant] was operating the truck within the meaning of § 52-556. He had parked the truck as an activity incident to moving it from one place to another along his designated maintenance route to fulfill his responsibilities for the department. There was, consequently, a temporal congruence between the operation of the truck and the plaintiff's injury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 176 Conn. App. 248 - Dinino v. Federal Express Corp.

2. “[a]ny person injured in person or property through the negligence of any state official or employee when operating a motor vehicle owned and insured by the state against personal injuries or property damage shall have a right of action against the state to recover damages for such injury.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 176 Conn. App. 248 - Dinino v. Federal Express Corp.

3. “there is a setting in motion of the operative machinery of the vehicle, or there is movement of the vehicle, or there is a circumstance resulting from that movement or an activity incident to the movement of the vehicle from one place to another .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 176 Conn. App. 248 - Dinino v. Federal Express Corp.