Legal Opinion
Monsam v. Dearington
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided April 13, 2004No. AC 23747PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
DUPONT, J.
The plaintiff in error, Andrew Monsam, the defendant in an underlying criminal case,1 by writ of error2 filed in this court on November 6, 2002, seeks a vacation of the judgment and a vacation of the sentence of contempt imposed by the trial court. Shortly after the writ was filed, the trial court, on November 14, 2002, vacated its finding of contempt, vacated “the sentence entered thereon [previously] on October 16, 2002” and ordered that the plaintiff in error receive jail credit for the period of time served in connection with the contempt judgment.3
*453The issues raised by…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- International Union, United Mine Workers v. BagwellSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- Bloom v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
- State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- Ullmann v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- State v. McElveenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Rowe v. Superior Court, Judicial District of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Quaranta v. CooleyConnecticut Appellate Court · 2011
- Eric S. v. Tiffany S.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- Rowe v. Superior Court, Judicial District of New HavenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2008
- Strauss v. StraussConnecticut Appellate Court · 2023