Skip to main content

Weiss v. Weiss

Citations

  • 297 Conn. 446
  • 998 A.2d 766
  • 2010 Conn. LEXIS 254

How courts have described this case

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

  • noting “the purposes of res judicata as promoting judicial economy, minimizing repetitive litigation, preventing inconsistent judgments and providing repose to parties”
  • “this court has identified the purposes of res judicata as promoting judicial economy, minimizing repetitive litigation, preventing inconsistent judgments and providing repose to parties”
  • \[r]es judicata prevents a litigant from reasserting a claim that has already been decided on the merits\ [internal quotation marks omitted]
  • conclusion that court lacks subject matter jurisdiction ‘‘by its very nature precludes the court from considering the merits’’ of nonjurisdictional claims
  • applicability of res judicata and collateral estoppel presents question of law
  • setting forth transactional test applied in civil context

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McLachlan, Palmer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

49 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

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

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.