Supreme Court of Connecticut· 7/31/1990
Doe v. State
Citations
- 216 Conn. 85
- 579 A.2d 37
- 1990 Conn. LEXIS 274
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that article first, § 10, provides no independent right to attorney’s fees
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Callahan
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
20 cases in this archive cite this case.
- New Mexico Right to Choose/NARAL v. JohnsonNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1999-06-23· cited 181×
- State v. JoynerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-05-04· cited 123×
- Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical CenterWashington Supreme Court· 2009-09-17· cited 108×
- Putman v. Wenatchee Valley Medical Center, PSWashington Supreme Court· 2009-09-17· cited 101×
- King v. KingWashington Supreme Court· 2007-12-06· cited 57×
- In re the Marriage of KingWashington Supreme Court· 2007-12-06· cited 47×
- Potvin v. Lincoln Service & Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-10-19· cited 41×
- State Board of Tax Commissioners v. Town of St. JohnIndiana Supreme Court· 2001-07-18· cited 37×
- In re the Water Use Permit ApplicationsHawaii Supreme Court· 2001-06-18· cited 26×
- Mangiante v. NiemiecConnecticut Appellate Court· 2006-12-05· cited 14×
- Mitchell v. Guardian Systems, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court· 2002-09-10· cited 12×
- Daimlerchrysler Services North America, LLC v. Commissioner of Revenue ServicesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-06-28· cited 11×
- Thunelius v. PosackiConnecticut Appellate Court· 2019-10-22· cited 10×
- Ames v. Commissioner of Motor VehiclesConnecticut Appellate Court· 2002-07-09· cited 8×
- In re Annessa J.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-06-20· cited 6×
- Town of St. John v. State Board of Tax CommissionersIndiana Tax Court· 2000-06-16· cited 4×
- Charts v. Nationwide Mutual InsuranceD. Connecticut· 2005-10-25· cited 4×
- Deutsche Bank AG v. Sebastian Holdings, Inc.Connecticut Appellate Court· 2025-11-11· cited 1×
- In re Delaware Public Schools LitigationSupreme Court of Delaware· 2024-01-30
- Derrick Crenshaw, as parent and next friend of Iyana Crenshaw, a minor v. Sonic Drive In of Greenville, Inc. (Appeal from Butler Circuit Court: CV-23-900074).Supreme Court of Alabama· 2024-12-06
Cites
60 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- In Re GAULTSupreme Court· 1967-05-15· cited 5,473×
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court· 1975-05-12· cited 4,586×
- Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.Supreme Court· 1981-08-28· cited 3,458×
- McGowan v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1961-05-29· cited 3,439×
- Boddie v. ConnecticutSupreme Court· 1971-03-02· cited 3,052×
- Harris v. McRaeSupreme Court· 1980-06-30· cited 1,702×
- Mills v. Electric Auto-Lite Co.Supreme Court· 1970-01-26· cited 1,683×
- Hall v. ColeSupreme Court· 1973-05-21· cited 1,138×
- United States v. KrasSupreme Court· 1973-01-10· cited 846×
- D'AMICO v. Board of Medical ExaminersCalifornia Supreme Court· 1974-03-19· cited 841×
- Connell v. ColwellSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1990-03-20· cited 724×
- Serrano v. PriestCalifornia Supreme Court· 1977-10-04· cited 669×
- Morris v. Hartford Courant Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-08-05· cited 432×
- Little v. StreaterSupreme Court· 1981-06-01· cited 419×
- Ortwein v. SchwabSupreme Court· 1973-03-05· cited 364×
- Ortwein v. SchwabSupreme Court· 1973-04-02· cited 314×
- Daily v. New Britain Machine Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1986-07-22· cited 284×
- Marsh, Day & Calhoun v. SolomonSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1987-08-04· cited 248×
- Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Inc.Supreme Court· 1985-06-26· cited 222×
- Cologne v. Westfarms AssociatesSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-01-17· cited 175×
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.