Skip to main content

Amore v. Frankel

Citations

  • 228 Conn. 358
  • 636 A.2d 786
  • 1994 Conn. LEXIS 9

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that because count one of the complaint alleged facts that supported a cause of action under Connecticut's defective highway statute, the count \was sufficient to establish subject matter jurisdiction and to withstand the defendant's motion to dismiss.\ Id.
  • upholding dismissal of action under § 13a-144 when plaintiff did not respond to commissioner's affidavits averring that department was not responsible for driveway at issue
  • “in the absence of any disputed issues of fact pertaining to jurisdiction, there was no need to hold an evidentiary hearing before deciding the motion to dismiss”
  • discussing commissioner’s duty under statute “to repair or maintain”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Berdon, Katz

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

20 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Amore v. Frankel

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.