Oakley v. Commission On Human Rights & Opportunities
Supreme Court of Connecticut
1Per curiam
The sole issue in this case is whether the trial court has jurisdiction to consider a motion for *29attorney’s fees pursuant to General Statutes § 4-184a1 if that motion is filed approximately five months after a final judgment on the merits of the underlying administrative appeal. The plaintiff, Barbara Oakley, appealed to the Superior Court from the decision of the named defendant, the commission on human rights and opportunities (commission), dismissing her complaint of sexual discrimination by the defendant, the state judicial branch. In her appeal, the plaintiff requested a remand for…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Whisper Wind Development Corp. v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Sharp v. Wyatt, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1994
- Gajewski v. PaveloSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1996
- Oakley v. Commission on Human Rights & OpportunitiesConnecticut Appellate Court · 1995
- Kupstis v. MichaudSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Meadowbrook Ctr., Inc. v. BuchmanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2018
- Bower v. D'OnfroConnecticut Appellate Court · 1997
- TRAYSTMAN, CORIC AND KERAMIDAS v. DaigleSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2007
- McDonald v. RoweConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
- Patron v. KonoverConnecticut Appellate Court · 1996
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.