Legal Opinion

Toise v. Rowe

Connecticut Appellate Court

Decided January 21, 1997No. 15090; 15362PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.

The plaintiffs, Stephanie Toise and David Dressier, appeal from the judgments of the trial court dismissing their appeals from the decisions of the bureau of rehabilitation services (bureau). On appeal, the plaintiffs claim that the trial court improperly dismissed the administrative appeals for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The following facts are relevant for this appeal. The plaintiffs have severe learning disabilities. They both qualified for assistance from the bureau.1 Although their *145individual requests to the bureau were not related or…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Figueroa v. C & S Ball BearingSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
  2. State v. MagnanoSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
  3. Lewis v. Connecticut Gaming Policy BoardSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
  4. New England Rehabilitation Hospital of Hartford, Inc. v. Commission on Hospitals & Health CareSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993
  5. Summit Hydropower Partnership v. Commissioner of Environmental ProtectionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1993

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Toise v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1998
  2. Dumais v. UnderwoodConnecticut Appellate Court · 1998
  3. Pickering v. Stanchak, No. Lpl-Cv-95-0470124s (Aug. 6, 1998)Connecticut Superior Court · 1998
  4. Toise v. RoweSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1997
  5. Toise v. RoweConnecticut Appellate Court · 2004

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

Powered by the Exa API