Connecticut Termination Law

In re Ryshan N.

Hartford, Connecticut family law lawyer represented mother in a parental termination action. Shortly after Ryshan's birth in February, 2022, he was adjudicated neglected and committed to the custody of the petitioner. The petitioner thereafter filed a petition to terminate the respondent's parental rights. On March 28, 2024, following a four day trial, the court issued a memorandum of... More...

$0 (02-14-2025 - CT)

In re Jaelyn K.M., et al.

<h2> Waterbury, Connecticut family law lawyers represented the parties in a termination of parental rights action. </h2> Prior to the birth of Jayden and Jaelynn, the two older children had been adjudicated neglected due to the respondent's substance abuse, and the respondent's parental rights with respect to the older children were terminated at separate proceedings in 2021. Thereafte... More...

$0 (12-03-2024 - CT)

In re Charli M.

<h2> New London, Connecticut family law lawyer represented the Defendant in a termination of parental rights case. </h2> [Charli] was born [in March, 2021].... [Charli] is [the] fourth biological child [of the Father and Charli's mother]. The mother and father began a relationship in 2012. The department became involved with the family in 2013 after receiving a report of dome... More...

$0 (11-06-2024 - CT)

In Re S.F., et al.

<h2> New Haven, Connecticut family law lawyer represented father in termination of parental rights case. </h2> The respondent father, Perry F., appeals from the judgments of the trial court, rendered in favor of the petitioner, the Commissioner of Children and Families, terminating his parental rights with respect to his children, A, B, and C.[1] On appeal, the respondent claims t... More...

$0 (11-02-2024 - CT)

Kathryn A. Briggs v. David L. Briggs

Stamford- Norwalk, Connecticut family law lawyer represented the Plaintiff and Defendant in a divorce. The parties were married in 2007 and have four minor children born issue of the marriage. The plaintiff commenced this action for dissolution on June 3, 2020. By way of a memorandum of decision filed on November 9, 2022, following a trial at which both parties and ... More...

$0 (08-20-2024 - CT)

Clifford Perkins v. Greater Bridgeport Transit Authority

New Haven, Connecticut civil rights lawyer represented Plaintiff who sued the Defendants on a civil rights violation theory under 42 U.S.C. 1983. In June 1998, GBTA hired Perkins, who identifies as African American, as a bus operator. L.R. 56(a)2 Statement of Facts ¶¶ 1-2, ECF No. 47 ("Pl.'s SMFâ€); L.R. 56(a)1 Statement of Facts ¶ 1, ECF No. 36-2 ("Defs.' SMFâ€). Bus operato... More...

$0 (09-29-2023 - CT)

Lisa Miro v. City of Bridgeport, et al.

New Haven, Connecticut civil rights lawyers represented Plaintiff who sued defendants on a Job Discrimination (Employment) theory. Job discrimination is illegal in the United States. There are a number of federal laws that protect workers from discrimination in employment, including: Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This law prohibits discrimination on the basis of... More...

$1 (08-11-2023 - CT)

United States of America v. Career Training Specialists, L.L.C. d/b/a Stone Academy and Mark Scheinberg

New Haven, Connecticut civil litigation lawyer represented Defendant accused of violating the False Claims Act. Career Training Specialists, LLC, doing business as Stone Academy, and its owner, Mark Scheinberg, agreed to paid more than $1 million to resolve allegations that they violated the federal False Claims Act by concealing a series of money order payments made by Scheinberg to prev... More...

$0 (05-27-2022 - CT)

United States of America v. Career Training Specialists, LLC, d/b/a Stone Academy

New Haven, Connecticut qui tam lawyers represented the United United States, which sued Defendant on a False Claims Act Violation theory. CAREER TRAINING SPECIALISTS, LLC, doing business as STONE ACADEMY, and its owner, MARK SCHEINBERG, paid more than $1 million to resolve allegations that they violated the federal False Claims Act by concealing a series of money order payments made by Sc... More...

$0 (05-27-2022 - CT)

Rachel Bentley v. AutoZoners, L.L.C.

<center> <img width="300" src="https://www.jud.ct.gov/external/imgs/kids/Supreme-today3.jpg"> </center> In this diversity action, plaintiff Rachel Bentley sues her former employer AutoZoners, LLC, and related company AutoZone Northeast LLC, for sex discrimination, retaliation, and a sex hostile work environment in violation of the Connecticut Fair Employment Practi... More...

$0 (08-21-2019 - CT)

United States of America v. Rezart Rakaj and Kliton Rakaj

<center> <img width="300" src="https://www.jud.ct.gov/external/imgs/kids/Supreme-today3.jpg"> </center> New Haven, CT - New Haven Property Owners Who Illegally Removed Asbestos are Sentenced REZART RAKAJ, 35, of Ansonia, and KLITON RAKAJ, 39, of Monroe, were sentenced in New Haven federal court for offenses related to the illegal and dangerous removal of asbestos at a New Have... More...

$0 (04-01-2019 - CT)

Gary W. Richards v. Direct Energy Services, LLC

<center> <img width="300" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1f/Seal_of_the_United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Second_Circuit.svg/300px-Seal_of_the_United_States_Court_of_Appeals_for_the_Second_Circuit.svg.png"> <h2> <h2> </h2> </center> Plaintiff‐Appellant Gary W. Richards (“Richards”) entered into an el... More...

$0 (02-04-2019 - CT)

Salvatore Cappetta v. Commissioners of Social Security Administration

<center> <img width="200" src="https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/US-SocialSecurityAdmin-Seal.svg/1200px-US-SocialSecurityAdmin-Seal.svg.png"> <center> 2 In 2009, an anonymous tipster reported to the Social Security 3 Administration (SSA) that petitioner Salvatore Cappetta was working 4 and earning substantial sums while receiving Social Security 5 di... More...

$0 (09-23-2018 - CT)

STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. ALRICK A. EVANS <table> <td>

The principal issue in this appeal is whether our decision in State v. Ray, 290 Conn. 602, 966 A.2d 148 (2009), which would require the defendant in the present case, Alrick A. Evans, to prove drug dependency as an affirmative defense to a charge under General Statutes (Rev. to 2011) § 21a-278 (b),1 remains good law in light of (1) the subsequent decision of the United States Supreme Court in Al... More...

$0 (08-16-2018 - CT)

STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. RAYMOND TUCKER <table> <td>

The defendant, Raymond Tucker, appeals from the judgment of the trial court finding him in violation of probation pursuant to General Statutes § 53a-32. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court (1) erred in admitting a 911 recording into evidence, (2) erroneously found that the defendant had violated his probation, and (3) abused its discretion in imposing a sentence of three years incarce... More...

$0 (01-19-2018 - CT)

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. WILLIAM BURKERT <table> <td>

On September 30, 2011, Halton filed three separate complaints, alleging that Burkert committed the petty disorderly persons offense of harassment on January 8, 9, and 11, 2011, in violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4(c).1 A three-day trial was held in 1 A petty disorderly persons offense is punishable by up to thirty days in jail. N.J.S.A. 2C:43-8. 5 the Elizabeth ... More...

$0 (12-21-2017 - CT)

In re Oreoluwa O.

In this certified appeal,1 we must decide whether the Appellate Court properly affirmed the judgment of the trial court terminating the parental rights of the respondent father, Olusegun O., as to his minor son, Oreoluwa O.2 See In re Oreoluwa O., 157 Conn. App. 490, 116 A.3d 400 (2015). On appeal, the respondent asserts, inter alia, that the Appellate Court improperlyaffirmedthejudgmentofthetria... More...

$0 (06-01-2016 - CT)

STATE OF CONNECTICUT v. JOSUE RODRIGUEZ

When a criminal defendant has been found to have violated the terms of his probation on the basis of allegations that he has committed a new crime while on probation, his appeal from the finding of violation of probation, contending that there was insufficient evidence for the trial court to conclude that he committed the new crime, is rendered moot if, subsequent to that finding, he either plead... More...

$0 (03-07-2016 - CT)

State Of Connecticut v. Palencia

The defendant, Jorge Carrillo Palencia, appeals from the judgment of conviction, rendered after a court trial, of one count of risk of injury to a child in violation of General Statutes § 53-21 (a) (1). On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictionand(2)thecourtimproperlydismissedhispostsentencing motion to open the judgment of ... More...

$0 (01-19-2016 - CT)

Lee v. Stanziale

In this landlord-tenant case, the defendant, Richard H. Stanziale, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding the plaintiff, Peter Lee, a total of $18,122.50 in attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to General Statutes § 52-251a. The defendant contends that the court abused its discretion in so doing. We disagree and, accordingly, affirm the judgment of the trial court. In its memorand... More...

$0 (11-23-2015 - CT)

Odyssey Reinsurance Company v. Cal-Regent Insurance Services Corporation

The Court presumes familiarity with the undisputed facts, which are set forth in the August Ruling. ECF No. 100 at 2-8. The Court adopts the defined terms used in the August Ruling. III. STANDARD OF REVIEW The court shall grant summary judgment if there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Fed. R. Civ. P. <b... More...

$2740802 (11-21-2015 - CT)

Campos v. Coleman

The named plaintiff, Gregoria Campos, in her individual capacity and in her capacity as administratrix of the estate of her late husband, Jose Mauricio Campos (decedent), and the Campos’ three children, Mauricio Campos, Jose Ernesto Campos and Jose Eduardo Campos(Campos children),brought this action against the defendants, Robert E. Coleman and LQ Management, LLC (LQ Management).2 The plaintiffs... More...

$0 (09-28-2015 - CT)

Hendricks v. Haydu

The defendant, Sandor Anthony Haydu, appeals from the judgment of the trial court granting in part the motion for modification of child support filed by the plaintiff, Kimberly Hendricks. On appeal, the defendant claims that the court improperly (1) excluded the plaintiff’s bonus income in calculating her gross income when modifying the child support award; (2) failed to deviate from the child s... More...

$0 (09-26-2015 - CT)

In re Santiago G.

The following facts and procedural history are relevant to this appeal. Santiago was born in Guatemala to the respondent on April 18, 2009. He was cared for since his birth, however, by Maria G., an Argentinian citizen and legal permanent resident of the United States who resided in Stamford, and, for some of that time, by Henry L., Maria G.’s husband.1 OnOctober16,2012,thecommissionerfiledamoti... More...

$0 (08-22-2015 - CT)

Aidan A. Smith v. Michael Hogan, President of the University of Connecticut

Plaintiff‐appellant Aidan A. Smith appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Arterton, J.) dismissing his complaint pursuant to Rules 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Because we conclude that an affidavit attached as an exhibit to a complaint is not a “written instrument” that is deemed p... More...

$0 (07-22-2015 - CT)

Daniel Golodner v. Martin Berliner

Plaintiffs-appellees Daniel Golodner and Security Technology Systems ("STSâ€) brought suit under 42 U.S.C. Â§ 1983 alleging that the City of New London ("the Cityâ€) and two City officials, defendants-appellants Martin Berliner and Robert Myers ("Appellantsâ€), retaliated against Golodner for exercising his rights under the First Amendment when he filed an earlier ... More...

$0 (10-27-2014 - CT)

Jennifer Raspardo, et al. v. John Carlone, et al.

11 Plaintiffsâ€Appellees (the "plaintiffsâ€), two former and one 12 current female New Britain police officers, brought suit in the 13 United States District Court for the District of Connecticut against 14 the City of New Britain, its police department, the police union, and 15 five individual police supervisors under Title VII of the Civil Rights 16 Act of 1964, 42 ... More...

$0 (10-13-2014 - CT)

In Re Shane M.

The respondent father appeals from the judgment of the trial court terminating his parental rights with respect to his minor child, Shane M.1 On appeal, the respondent argues the court improperly (1) terminated his parental rights pursuant to General Statutes Â§ 17a-112 (j) based on an overly broad interpretation of the statute; (2) terminated his parental rights based on insufficient evidence; ... More...

$0 (02-18-2014 - CT)

Kevin Shevlin v. Civil Service Commission of the City of Bridgeport

This administrative appeal requires us to construe the Bridgeport City Charter (charter) and the rules (rules) of the Bridgeport Civil Service Commission (commission) to identify the date on which eligibility (eligibility date) to take fire captain promotion examination number 2319 (examination 2319) should have been determined. To determine the eligibility date, we must first decide whether the t... More...

$0 (02-24-2014 - CT)

Brian O'Toole v. Eyelets of Industry, Inc.

In this uncontested wrongful termination action, the plaintiff, Brian O'Toole, appeals from the trial court's sua sponte dismissal of his complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiff claims that the trial court improperly dismissed his complaint because the court had (1) concurrent jurisdiction to decide his claim brought pursuant to 38 U.S.C. Â§ 4301 et seq., and (2) subject... More...

$0 (02-24-2014 - CT)

Carmen L. Lopez v. Board of Education of the City of Bridgeport, et al.

An action seeking a writ of quo warranto provides a ''limited and extraordinary remedy'' that is the ''exclusive'' avenue under both the common law and General Statutes Â§ 52-4911 for judicial review of, inter alia, a person's qualifications to hold a particular public office. (Internal quotation marks omitted.) Bateson v. Weddle, 306 Conn. 1, 10â€“11, 48 A.3d 652 (2... More...

$0 (11-26-2013 - CT)

Marianne Olson v. Fusaini Mohammadu

The question that we must resolve in this appeal is whether a trial court may properly deny a motion for modification of alimony and child support solely on the basis that a party's voluntary actions gave rise to the alleged substantial change in circumstances warranting modification. The defendant, Fusaini Mohammadu, appealed to the Appellate Court from the judgment of... More...

$0 (12-10-2013 - CT)

Leslie Milliun v. New Milford Hospital

In the present case, we principally examine the circumstances under which a treating physician's medical records can be admitted as expert evidence of causation in a medical malpractice action. The trial court rendered summary judgment in favor of the defendant New Milford Hospital1 on the ground that the plaintiff, Lynnia Milliun, the conservator of her sister, Leslie ... More...

$0 (12-31-2013 - CT)

Fairchild Heights Residents Association, Inc. v. Fairchild Heights, Inc.

The plaintiff, Fairchild Heights Residents Association, Inc. (association), appeals from the judgment of the Appellate Court, which reversed the judgment of the trial court and directed that court to dismiss the association's claims alleging negligence and violations of the Connecticut Unfair Trade Practices Act (CUTPA), General Statutes Â§ 42-110a et seq., against th... More...

$0 (01-28-2014 - CT)

Cruz v. Visual Perceptions, LLC

The issue that we must resolve in this certified appeal is whether the trial court properly determined that a letter agreement between the parties plainly and unambiguously constituted a contract for a defined period of time or, instead, the letter agreement reasonably could be interpreted as governing the terms and conditions of the plaintiff's at-will employment.1 The... More...

$0 (02-11-2014 - CT)

Blumberg Associates Worldwide, Inc. v. Brown & Brown of Connecticut, Inc.

This case requires us to determine when a reviewing court properly may raise and decide an issue that was not raised by the parties. The plaintiff, Blumberg Associates Worldwide, Inc., brought this action against the defendants, Brown and Brown of Connecticut, Inc. (Brown & Brown), and Brown and Brown, Inc. (parent company), alleging, inter alia, that the defendants had... More...

$0 (02-17-2014 - CT)

Isabel Modaffari v. Greenwich Hospital

Isabel Modaffari sued Greenwich Hospital on a wrongful termination theory claiming that she was forced to resign from her phlebotomist job with the Hospital because she reported contaminated blood vials in the hospital. She claimed that Defendant violation Connecticut Statutes Section 31-51g and violated her free speech. She claimed that she found clear liquids in blood vials, which she r... More...

$0 (12-19-2013 - CT)

Linda Coolick v. Abigail Hughes

This is an appeal from a denial of a renewed motion for summary judgment by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Eginton, J.). Defendant-Appellant Abigail Hughes ("Hughesâ€), the Superintendent of the Connecticut Technical High School System, renewed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that she is entitled to qualified immunity in this Â§ 1983 action in which... More...

$0 (10-25-2012 - CT)

Georgina Spilke v. Joseph M. Wicklow, III

The self-represented plaintiff, Georgina Spilke, appeals from the judgment of the trial court awarding her $30,003 against the defendant, her former husband, Kenneth Spilke, and $1 in nominal damages against the defendant Jennifer Ballard1 on her vexatious litigation claim. The defendants cross appeal from the judgment rendered against them. The vexatious litigation action stemmed from a motion fo... More...

$0 (09-24-2012 - CT)

Landmark Investment Group, LLC v. Chung Family Realty Partnership, LLC

The defendant, Chung Family Realty Partnership, LLC, appeals from the trial court's order granting the application for a prejudgment remedy filed by the plaintiff, Landmark Investment Group, LLC. On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the doctrine of res judicata prevents the plaintiff from relitigating issues that have been or could have been litigated in the first litigation; and (2) the court... More...

$0 (08-28-2012 - CT)