• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

Connecticut Appeals

Advance Release Opinions - Review and Analysis

  • Home
  • Supreme Court
  • Appellate Court
  • About Christopher G Brown
  • Contact Me
Home » Election Law

Election Law

Advance Release Opinions – Supreme Court – June 1, 8, 22 and 29

July 5, 2018 by Christopher G Brown

Reviews of Connecticut Supreme Court advance release opinions about civil procedure, election law, and worker’s compensation.

Civil Procedure

Samelko v. Kingstone Insurance Company – Kingstone is a New York insurance company that issued a business car insurance policy in New York covering a business located in New York and a vehicle garaged in New York. The coverage territory was the United States. Insured driver collided with the Samelkos in Connecticut. The Samelkos sued the insured. Kingstone declined to defend. Default judgment entered in the Samelkos’ favor, which Kingstone declined to pay. The Samelkos then exercised their subrogation rights and sued Kingstone. Trial court dismissed the action for lack of personal jurisdiction, finding that Kingstone had no contacts with Connecticut and thus no notice that it might be sued in Connecticut. Supreme Court reversed, finding that because the policy had a nationwide coverage territory (1) the contract was “to be performed” in Connecticut under our corporate long arm statute; (2) it was foreseeable that Kingstone would have to perform in Connecticut, which provided the necessary minimum contacts with Connecticut; and (3) it was fair and reasonable to require Kingstone to defend itself in Connecticut.

Election Law

Arciniega v. Feliciano – Reversed. Candidate 1 lacked standing to attack validity of petition that led to Candidate 2’s inclusion on the ballot in a primary election because Candidate 1 was not aggrieved “by the ruling of an election official” as the statute required. Specifically, though Candidate 2’s address was wrong on the petition, there was no statute requiring an election official to reject a petition containing an inaccurate address. Since there was no rejection requirement, there was no “ruling” in accepting the petition with the inaccurate address. Since there had to be a ruling before there could be standing to complain about the ruling, there was no standing.

Cook-Littman v. Board of Selectman – Reversed. Town’s charter, not state statute, set procedure for filling a vacancy on the board of selectman because it is a matter of purely local concern.

Worker’s Compensation

Williams v. New Haven – Worker received benefits, returned to work, but was ultimately terminated for worker’s compensation fraud. Worker filed a grievance, which the parties arbitrated under the collective bargaining agreement. Worker lost both the arbitration and the motion in Superior Court to vacate the arbitration award. Meanwhile, worker filed a statutory wrongful discharge claim under CGS § 31-290a with the worker’s compensation commission. City moved to dismiss, arguing that since worker was pursuing a statutory wrongful termination claim before the worker’s compensation commission instead of a “court of competent jurisdiction” as required by CGS § 31-51bb and Genovese, the arbitration collaterally estopped the wrongful termination claim. Commissioner denied the motion. Review board affirmed. Supreme Court also affirmed, finding that (1) “court of competent jurisdiction” includes worker’s compensation commission for purposes of § 31-51bb and Genovese; (2) Superior Court motion to vacate the arbitration award did not satisfy § 31-51bb’s requirement of judicial review of statutory claim; and (3) § 31-51bb and Genovese allow the worker to pursue the same or a substantially similar claim after the adverse arbitration decision.

 

Share this:

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Supreme Court Tagged With: Election Law, Procedure, Worker's Comp

Advance Release Opinions – March 26

March 27, 2018 by Christopher G Brown

Review of the Connecticut Supreme Court’s advance release opinion about election law.

Election Law

Keeley v. Ayala – Nobody should have needed the Connecticut Supreme Court to confirm that the impropriety of the absentee-ballot shenanigans that occurred in this primary election for two seats on the Bridgeport City Council. The shenanigans included: (1) the candidate (the one that ended up with the most votes) instructed a police officer to go to certain locations to pick up absentee ballots; (2) the officer didn’t confirm the identities of the people giving him the ballots; (3) the officer, more than once, accepted multiple ballots from a single person; and (4) absentee ballots that the officer didn’t pick up and that weren’t postmarked were nonetheless counted in the result. Trial court invalidated the election and directed that a new primary be conducted. Supreme Court affirmed.

Share this:

  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to print (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on LinkedIn (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Pinterest (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Filed Under: Supreme Court Tagged With: Election Law

Primary Sidebar

Looking for something specific?

Subscribe

Sign up to receive Decision Alerts by email:

Thanks for your interest!

Follow me on:

Tags

Administrative Law Attorney's Fees Attorney Discipline Business Dissolution Child Support Class Actions Commercial Litigation Condemnation Constitutional Contracts Custody and Visitation Damages Debt Collection Deed Restriction Defamation Divorce Domestic Relations Easement Election Law Eminent Domain Employment Eviction Evidence False Arrest Foreclosure Governmental Immunity Insurance Medical Malpractice Municipal Law Noncompete Agreement Personal Injury Pleading Probate Procedure Professional Negligence Reformation Spite Fence Standing Taxation Trespass Underinsured Motorist Vicarious Liability Visitation Withdrawals Worker's Comp

Archives

  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016

Footer

Tags

Administrative Law Attorney's Fees Attorney Discipline Business Dissolution Child Support Class Actions Commercial Litigation Condemnation Constitutional Contracts Custody and Visitation Damages Debt Collection Deed Restriction Defamation Divorce Domestic Relations Easement Election Law Eminent Domain Employment Eviction Evidence False Arrest Foreclosure Governmental Immunity Insurance Medical Malpractice Municipal Law Noncompete Agreement Personal Injury Pleading Probate Procedure Professional Negligence Reformation Spite Fence Standing Taxation Trespass Underinsured Motorist Vicarious Liability Visitation Withdrawals Worker's Comp

Christopher G. Brown
Begos Brown & Green LLP
2425 Post Road, Suite 205
Southport CT 06890
(203) 254-1902

Copyright © 2025 · Genesis Sample Theme on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in