Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2/6/1996
Nielsen v. State
Citations
- 236 Conn. 1
- 670 A.2d 1288
- 1996 Conn. LEXIS 22
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that plaintiffs’ action seeking to compel legislature to enact certain statutory definitions necessary to implement spending cap contemplated by adoption of article third, § 18, of state constitution was nonjusticiable
- court lacks power to compel legislature to define terms of state constitutional spending cap
- the mootness doctrine ensures that an actual controversy exists
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Berdon, Peters
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
15 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Pamela B. v. MentSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1998-03-31· cited 501×
- Sheff v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1996-07-09· cited 97×
- Connecticut Coalition for Justice in Education Funding, Inc. v. RellSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-03-30· cited 72×
- Office of the Governor v. Select Committee of InquirySupreme Court of Connecticut· 2004-06-18· cited 46×
- Milford Power Co v. Alstom Power, Inc.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-05-20· cited 45×
- McCulloch v. Hartford Life & Accident InsuranceD. Connecticut· 2005-03-28· cited 31×
- State v. SebastianSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1997-09-02· cited 25×
- 184 Windsor Avenue, LLC. v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2005-07-05· cited 19×
- Board of Education v. Town & BoroughSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-08-14· cited 19×
- Seymour v. Region One Board of EducationSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-08-20· cited 18×
- 98 Lords Highway, LLC v. One Hundred Lords Highway, LLCConnecticut Appellate Court· 2012-10-23· cited 15×
- Costantino v. SkolnickSupreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-02-16· cited 12×
- O'Halloran v. Charlotte Hungerford HospitalConnecticut Appellate Court· 2001-05-15· cited 12×
- U.S. Bank National Assn. v. Rothermel.Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2021-06-23· cited 5×
- Roger Sherman Liberty Center, Inc. v. WilliamsConnecticut Superior Court· 2011-06-27
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Baker v. CarrSupreme Court· 1962-03-26· cited 6,173×
- Horton v. MeskillSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1977-04-19· cited 383×
- Nixon v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1993-01-13· cited 369×
- State v. NardiniSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-05-11· cited 161×
- Adams v. RubinowSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1968-11-20· cited 156×
- Pellegrino v. O'NeillSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-07-17· cited 85×
- Parker v. County of Los AngelesSupreme Court· 1949-12-05· cited 80×
- Spiegel, Inc. v. WhitakerSupreme Court· 1981-11-02· cited 65×
- Stolberg v. CaldwellSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1978-08-08· cited 57×
- State v. SanabriaSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1984-04-10· cited 44×
- Horton v. MeskillSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1985-01-15· cited 41×
- Fonfara v. Reapportionment CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1992-05-26· cited 34×
- Stolberg v. DavidsonSupreme Court· 1981-11-02· cited 33×
- Nielsen v. KezerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-01-31· cited 22×
- State Ex Rel. Cotter v. LeipnerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1951-07-30· cited 9×
Other cases named Nielsen v. State
10 other CourtListener records share this case name.
- Nielsen v. StateAlaska Supreme Court· 1981-02-06· cited 17×
- Nielsen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1992-11-25· cited 13×
- Nielsen v. StateWyoming Supreme Court· 2018-12-03· cited 11×
- Nielsen v. StateAlaska Supreme Court· 1971-12-30· cited 7×
- Nielsen v. StateAlaska Supreme Court· 1981-05-15· cited 3×
- Nielsen v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-09-08
- Nielsen v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2008-01-31
- Nielsen v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1981-02-17
- Nielsen v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-02-20
- Nielsen v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2019-02-20
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.