Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 89 Conn. App. 57 - Larson v. Larson

89 Conn. App. 57 - Larson v. Larson’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
1
states following
July 2016
most recently cited

8 state decisions

Relationships

Applies 11 U.S.C. § 101 (Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act of 2005) · 11 U.S.C. § 523

Relies on Pandolphe's Auto Parts, Inc. v. Town of Manchester · Miller v. Gentry · Bush v. Vera · Pauley v. Spong · Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp. v. CF&I Fabricators of Utah, Inc.

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

  1. “Whether a party has shown good cause in not pursuing a motion within the three month limitation is a question of fact for the trial court.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 164 Conn. App. 751 - Nuzzi v. Nuzzi · 166 Conn. App. 809 - Ill v. Manzo-Ill
  2. “Unless for good cause shown, no motion may be reclaimed after a period of three months from the date of filing.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. 164 Conn. App. 751 - Nuzzi v. Nuzzi · 166 Conn. App. 809 - Ill v. Manzo-Ill

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.