Kinsey v. Pacific Employers Insurance
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1ConcurrenceZarella, J.
Although I agree with and join in the reasoning of the majority in all respects, I write separately to disassociate myself from the unwarranted speculation in the concurrence of Justice Borden that a coordinate branch of government may have acted unconstitutionally in enacting General Statutes § l-2z. I am concerned that Justice Borden’s concurring opinion represents a significant and unfortunate departure from our jurisprudence of restraint and deference. In the present case, it is clear from the record that neither *420party has claimed that § l-2z is unconstitutional, and, indeed, the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Ashwander v. Tennessee Valley AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1936
- Binette v. SaboSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Moore v. McNamaraSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1986
- State v. OnofrioSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.