Legal Opinion
Taravella v. Stanley
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided March 30, 1999No. AC 17077PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
HEALEY, J.
This appeal involves the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act (URESA), General Statutes (Rev. to 1995) § 46b-180 et seq.1 The issue to be decided is whether under our URESA statute a respondent2 in an action on the issue of paternity is entitled to a jury trial under General Statutes (Rev. , to 1995) § 46b-164.3 In oral argument before this court, the respondent’s counsel abandoned any constitutional claim, state or federal, that he had made,4 and thus, we are presented solely with the statutory issue of whether the respondent is entitled to a jury trial on the issue…
2Cases cited37 opinions
- Daily v. New Britain Machine Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Duguay v. HopkinsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- Knapp, Stout & Co. v. McCaffreySupreme Court of the United States · 1900
- Struckman v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Venuto v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.California Court of Appeal · 1971
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Morales v. Pentec, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Gomes v. Massachusetts Bay InsuranceConnecticut Appellate Court · 2005
- Garrison v. Planning Board of StamfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2001