Legal Opinion
In re Robin M.
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided November 1, 1994No. 12990PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.
The respondent appeals from only that part of the judgment that consists of a warning issued pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-149 (h).1 The respondent claims that the trial court improperly issued the “Long Lane Warning” concerning future possible behavior because (1) the respondent had attained the age of sixteen, and (2) it was not part of the previous agreement of the parties.
On June 10,1993, the respondent, a fifteen year old girl, was adjudicated a child from a family with service needs pursuant to General Statutes § 46b-120. The respondent had admitted, in the presence of her attorney…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Winchester Woods Associates v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1991
- First Charter National Bank v. RossConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- Zarembski v. WarrenConnecticut Appellate Court · 1992
- First Charter National Bank v. RossSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Scarsdale National Bank & Trust Co. v. SchmitzConnecticut Appellate Court · 1991
3Cited by1 opinion
- Willocks v. KleinConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995