Legal Opinion

Lipwich v. Frankel

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided April 8, 1997No. 15452PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.

The plaintiff appeals from the judgment rendered by the trial court granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment. The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly (1) rendered summary judgment by incorrectly interpreting applicable statutes and (2) refused the plaintiff permission to amend her complaint. The plaintiff also alleges that the doctrine of sovereign or governmental immunity should be abolished for negligence claims against the state. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The plaintiff commenced this action against the defendant commissioner of transportation…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Horton v. MeskillSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1977
  2. White v. BurnsSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
  3. Burns v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  4. Amore v. FrankelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
  5. Hunte v. BlumenthalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Adams v. Champagne, No. Cv98-061154 (May 20, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998
  2. Lipwich v. FrankelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  3. Morneau v. StateConnecticut Appellate Court · 2014
  4. Rodriguez v. Melekey, No. 97 0342710 (Jul. 22, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998

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

Powered by the Exa API