Opinion · Supreme Court of Connecticut
Dickinson v. Mullaney
277 Conn. 913
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of Connecticut
- Jurisdiction
- Connecticut
- Date
- 2006-03-02
- Topic
- general
The respondents’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 92 Conn. App. 689 (AC 25704), is granted, limited to the following issue: “Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court had improperly applied the defense of laches in this habeas corpus action?” *914 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17614. Jo Anne Sulik, senior assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Temmy Ann Pieszak, chief of habeas corpus services, in opposition. Decided March 2, 2006
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Dickinson v. Mullaney. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Cited by
- 1 opinion
The respondents’ petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 92 Conn. App. 689 (AC 25704), is granted, limited to the following issue:
“Did the Appellate Court properly determine that the trial court had improperly applied the defense of laches in this habeas corpus action?”
*914 The Supreme Court docket number is SC 17614. Jo Anne Sulik, senior assistant state’s attorney, in support of the petition. Temmy Ann Pieszak, chief of habeas corpus services, in opposition. Decided March 2, 2006