Skip to main content

Santiago v. State

Citations

  • 261 Conn. 533
  • 804 A.2d 801
  • 2002 Conn. LEXIS 400

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that statute is mandatory if it addresses matter of substance. If it is simply a matter of convenience, it is considered directory
  • holding that statute is mandatory if it addresses matter of substance. If it is simply a matter of convenience, it is considered directory
  • noncompliance with directory statute ‘‘will not invalidate any future proceedings contem- plated by the statute unless the noncompliance has prejudiced the opposing party’’
  • noncompliance with mandatory provision will invalidate any future proceedings contemplated by statute
  • noncompliance with mandatory provision will invalidate any future proceedings con- templated by statute
  • mandatory statutory provisions are \typically\ subject to waiver

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Palmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

16 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this 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.