Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that appeal period set by § 31-301 [a] is subject matter jurisdictional and nonwaivable
• noting board’s numerous decisions over period of thirty years constitutes time-tested interpretation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commissioner of Mental Health & Addiction Services v. Saeedi
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2013-07-09· cited 110×
• Dechio v. Raymark Industries, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-12-28· cited 13×
• Pagan v. Carey Wiping Materials Corp.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2013-07-30· cited 7×
• JP Morgan Chase Bank v. GIANOPOULOS
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2011-08-30· cited 4×
• Crandle v. Connecticut State Employees Retirement Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2022-02-01· cited 3×
• Shaw v. Freeman
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2012-03-06· cited 3×
• Commissioner of Public Safety v. Freedom of Information Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2014-07-15
• Sarrazin v. Coastal, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2014-04-29
• Ferraro v. Ridgefield European Motors, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2014-09-23
• Sullins v. United Parcel Service, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2015-02-17
• McCullough v. Swan Engraving, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2016-02-02
• Neighborhood Assn., Inc. v. Limberger
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2016-04-26
• Nonhuman Rights Project, Inc. v. R.W. Commerford & Sons, Inc.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2020-05-19

Cites

43 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Ambroise v. William Raveis Real Estate, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-08-03· cited 190×
• Mahoney v. Lensink
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1990-01-30· cited 186×
• Lynn v. Haybuster Manufacturing, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1993-07-06· cited 139×
• Williams v. Commission On Human Rights & Opportunities
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2001-08-07· cited 91×
• Hatt v. Burlington Coat Factory
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2003-04-22· cited 91×
• State v. Cruz
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2004-05-25· cited 91×
• Kinney v. State
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1989-11-28· cited 81×
• Curry v. Allan S. Goodman, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-04-15· cited 77×
• State v. FERNANDO A.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-11-03· cited 74×
• State v. Orr
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-05-26· cited 74×
• Gold v. Rowland
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-05-11· cited 68×
• City of Hartford v. Hartford Municipal Employees Ass'n
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2002-01-29· cited 47×
• Thomas v. Department of Developmental Services
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2010-07-13· cited 46×
• Cruz v. Montanez
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-12-22· cited 44×
• Cambodian Buddhist Society of Connecticut, Inc. v. Planning & Zoning Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2008-02-12· cited 44×
• Hubbard v. Planning Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1963-12-23· cited 44×
• Chieppo v. Robert E. McMichael, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1975-12-02· cited 44×
• Longley v. State Employees Retirement Commission
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2007-10-02· cited 39×
• Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Lighthouse Landings, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2006-07-11· cited 39×
• Hud/Barbour-Waverly v. Wilson
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 1995-12-26· cited 34×

Other cases named Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.
  Connecticut Appellate Court· 2009-04-28· cited 8×
• Stec v. Raymark Industries, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Connecticut· 2009-07-29· cited 1×