Rosado v. Bridgeport Roman Catholic Diocesan Corp.
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Dissent
SULLIVAN, C. J.,
with whom ZARELLA, J., joins, dissenting. The majority concludes that the Appellate Court properly treated the trial court’s actions as the effective equivalent of allowing the New York Times Company (Times), the Globe Newspaper Company, Inc., the Washington Post Company and the Hartford Courant Company (collectively, newspapers), to intervene in the withdrawn cases1 and restoring the cases *232to the docket. I would conclude that the trial court’s action is more properly characterized as the effective equivalent of docketing the newspapers’ motions for the limited purpose of…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- John A. Pansy v. Borough of Stroudsburg Harold A. Bentzoni Kathryn Mikels John W. Osborne, II William Reber Mary Jean Knapik Maryann West Kowalshyn Richard F. Osswald Carl R. Rogers v. Ottaway Newspapers, Inc. T/a Pocono Record, Ronald F. Bouchard Pennsylvania Newspaper Publishers Association, Intervenors/appellantsCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1994
- Public Citizen v. Liggett Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1988
- In Re "Agent Orange" Product Liability LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1987
- Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. National Children's Center, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1998
- CFM of Connecticut, Inc. v. ChowdhurySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.