Connecticut Appellate Court· 7/20/1993
Shedrick v. Shedrick
Citations
- 32 Conn. App. 147
- 627 A.2d 1387
- 1993 Conn. App. LEXIS 327
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that mailing a copy of the motion to modify to the nonmovant does not comply with requirements set forth in § 52-50
- by prescribing the methods of service of postjudgment motions in the context of alimony and support, General Statutes § 46b-86 (a), the legislature is preserving the due process rights of the opposing party
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Freedman
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
3 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Winchester Woods Associates v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-06-18· cited 349×
- Turner v. TurnerSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1991-07-18· cited 182×
- Sanchione v. SanchioneSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1977-08-16· cited 125×
- Caltabiano v. Planning & Zoning CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-06-27· cited 124×
- Verrastro v. SivertsenSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1982-08-24· cited 123×
- Darak v. DarakSupreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-03-21· cited 111×
- Paddock v. PaddockConnecticut Appellate Court· 1990-07-17· cited 47×
- Suprenant v. City of New BritainConnecticut Appellate Court· 1992-08-25· cited 9×
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.