Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 87 Conn. App. 235 - Parente v. Pirozzoli

87 Conn. App. 235 - Parente v. Pirozzoli’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

27
cited by 27 later decisions
2
states following
June 2021
most recently cited

4 district · 23 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently June 2021 · most notably Hanks v. Powder Ridge Restaurant Corp. (2005), Atlantic Coast Builders & Contractors, LLC v. Lewis (2012)

4 district · 23 state decisions

130200520102020decided

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 Kaiser Steel Corp. v. Mullins · Speth v. New Jersey · Danner v. Kentucky · Web Press Services Corp. v. New London Motors, Inc. · Dowling v. Slotnik

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

  1. “Generally, agreements contrary to public policy, that is those that negate laws enacted for the common good, are illegal and therefore unenforceable.... Agreements that are legal on their face, yet which are designed to evade statutory requirements, are routinely held unenforceable.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]hen a matter required to be specially pleaded by a party is fully litigated at trial without objection from the opposing party, the latter's objection to the special pleading requirement is deemed to have been waived.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “designed to evade statutory requirements....”
    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.