Legal Opinion
Bleidner v. Searles
Connecticut Appellate Court
Decided July 11, 1989No. 6802PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtFoti, J.
The petitioner appeals from the trial court’s judgment dismissing his petition for a new trial pursuant to General Statutes § 52-270.1 We find no error.
*77The facts relevant to our resolution of this appeal are not in dispute. In January, 1984, the respondent initiated a paternity action against the petitioner seeking a judicial determination that the petitioner was the father of her son born on August 26,1983. On August 3, 1984, the trial court approved a stipulation of judgment, agreed to by the parties and signed by their attorneys, in which the petitioner stipulated to paternity and agreed…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State v. GrimesSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1966
- Krooner v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1950
- Vogel v. VogelSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1979
- Wetzel v. ThorneSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1987
- Perkins v. PerkinsConnecticut Appellate Court · 1985
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Skakel v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2010
- Labow v. LabowConnecticut Appellate Court · 2002
- Jacobs v. FazzanoConnecticut Appellate Court · 2000
- Cardona v. NegronConnecticut Appellate Court · 1999
- Fitzpatrick v. Hall-Brooke Foundation, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court · 2002
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.