Emerick v. Town of Glastonbury
Connecticut Appellate Court
1Opinion of the CourtDiPENTIMA, C.J.
The trial court possesses the inherent power to impose sanctions on litigants in cases before it, including dismissing the case, both to compel observance of its rules and to bring an end to continuing violations of those rules. D'Ascanio v. Toyota Industries Corp ., 309 Conn. 663 , 670-71, 72 A.3d 1019 (2013). This power "rests within the discretion of the trial court and will not be disturbed on review unless there is an abuse of discretion.... Generally, a sanction should not serve as a punishment or penalty.... Such drastic action is not, however, an abuse of discretion where a party…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- National Hockey League v. Metropolitan Hockey Club, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Binette v. SaboSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
- Millbrook Owners Ass'n v. Hamilton StandardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2001
- State v. BuhlSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2016
- Pavlinko v. Yale-New Haven HospitalSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1984
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- State v. BagnaschiConnecticut Appellate Court · 2018
- State v. CussonConnecticut Appellate Court · 2022
- Maurice v. Chester Housing Associates Ltd. PartnershipConnecticut Appellate Court · 2019
- Emerick v. ConnecticutDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 2020
- Emerick v. Town of GlastonburySupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.