Grady v. Town of Somers

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that Sestito v. Groton, supra, 178 Conn. 520, ‘‘appears . . . to be limited to its facts’’
• observing that Sestito v. Groton, supra, 178 Conn. 520, ‘‘appears . . . to be limited to its facts’’
• overruling ‘‘dicta’’ in Pane v. Danbury, 267 Conn. 669, 841 A.2d 684 (2004), and Sanzone v. Board of Police Commission- ers, 219 Conn. 179, 191–92, 592 A.2d 912 (1991
• addressing alternative ground for affirmance that trial court did not reach because it involved ques- tion of law over which review was plenary
• reviewing legis- lative history of § 52-557n in concluding that phrase ‘‘except as provided by law’’ in subsection (a) (2) (B) encompasses identifiable person, imminent harm excep- tion to discretionary act immunity at common law
• overruling ‘‘dicta’’ in Pane v. Danbury, 267 Conn. 669, 841 A.2d 684 (2004), and Sanzone v. Board of Police Commission- ers, 219 Conn. 179, 191–92, 592 A.2d 912 (1991

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).