Legal Opinion
In re Shonna K.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided June 3, 2003No. AC 23107PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Opinion
FOTI, J.
The respondent, Shonna K, appeals from the judgment of the trial court denying her application *248for a temporary injunction1 requiring the petitioner, the commissioner of children and families (commissioner), to provide her a clinically appropriate support placement. The respondent argues that the court improperly determined that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because she had reached the age of eighteen. We agree and, accordingly, reverse the judgment of the trial court.
The following facts and procedural history are necessary for our resolution of the respondent’s appeal.…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- State v. CurcioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1983
- State v. CourchesneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2003
- Loisel v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1995
- Figueroa v. C & S Ball BearingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Audubon Parking Associates Ltd. Partnership v. Barclay & Stubbs, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re Matthew F.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Santana v. City of HartfordConnecticut Appellate Court · 2006
- Doe v. RapoportConnecticut Appellate Court · 2003
- Kleinman v. ChapnickConnecticut Appellate Court · 2013
- State v. DavisConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.