Legal Opinion · Dissent

Shannon v. Commissioner of Housing

Supreme Court of Connecticut

Decided August 2, 2016No. SC19562Published

1DissentEspinosa, J.

I respectfully disagree with the majority's conclusion that the decision of the defendant, the Commissioner of Housing,1 to terminate rental assistance provided under a statutory rental assistance program to the plaintiff, Francis Shannon, on the basis of § 17b-812-13 (9) of the Regulations of Connecticut State Agencies was an impermissible retroactive application of the regulation as applied to the plaintiff. The majority reasons that under General Statutes § 55-3, which codifies a presumption against the retroactivity of enacted statutes unless explicitly stated otherwise, the termination…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Goldberg v. KellySupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Landgraf v. USI Film ProductsSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  3. Smith v. DoeSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
  4. Cox v. HartSupreme Court of the United States · 1923
  5. Gary Laguerre v. Janet Reno, Jose, Martin Avelar-Cruz v. Janet RenoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1999

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API