Legal Opinion

Litvack v. Artusio

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided August 7, 2012No. AC 33305PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*399 Opinion

PETERS, J.

“Standing is the legal right to set judicial machinery in motion. One cannot rightfully invoke the jurisdiction of the court unless he [or she] has, in an individual or representative capacity, some real interest in the cause of action, or a legal or equitable right, title or interest in the subject matter of the controversy.” (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Dept. of Education, 303 Conn. 402, 411, 35 A.3d 188 (2012). The principal issue in this appeal is whether the trial court properly held that the plaintiff, suing in her individual…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Gazo v. City of StamfordSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
  2. Stowe v. SmithSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1981
  3. Krawczyk v. StingleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
  4. State v. McElveenSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2002
  5. Gold v. RowlandSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lawrence v. WeinerConnecticut Appellate Court · 2015
  2. Simpson v. United StatesDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API