﻿<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--RSS generated by Windows SharePoint Services V3 RSS Generator on 2/9/2010 4:56:48 PM-->
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="/lawlibnews/_layouts/RssXslt.aspx?List=8a056638-f635-47d2-8729-1ebe10b60458" version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>CT Judicial Law Libraries' NewsLog</title>
    <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/AllPosts.aspx</link>
    <description>Helping you stay informed about recent legal developments, legal practice tools, and law library resources in Connecticut.</description>
    <copyright>Connecticut Judicial Branch</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:56:48 GMT</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>Windows SharePoint Services V3 RSS Generator</generator>
    <ttl>30</ttl>
    
    <item>
      <title>CT Office of Legislative Research Reports</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1084</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> FYI;Legal Research</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass3174F73DAF1A4DCD99A4080A37D5DE27><font color="#000000" size=2>The </font><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/olr/default.asp"><font size=2>Office of Legislative Research </font></a><font color="#000000" size=2>(OLR) has issued the following reports:</font></div>
<div class=ExternalClass3174F73DAF1A4DCD99A4080A37D5DE27>
<ul>
<li><font color="#000000" size=2><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0017.htm">Proposals to Amend Connecticut Law on Storage of Property After an Eviction </a>- </font><span><font color="#000000"><font size=2>2010-R-0017<br><em><span>You asked for a summary of proposals to amend Connecticut</span><span>'</span><span>s law on the disposal of property after an eviction</span><span>.</span></em></font></font></span></li></ul></div>
<ul>
<li><span><span><font color="#000000"><font size=2><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0024.htm">Duty of Mental Health Professionals to Warn of Potentially Violent Conduct by Patients </a>- <span>2010-R-0024 <span><br><em>You asked whether mental health professionals have a duty to warn law enforcement officials or potential victims of potentially violent conduct by patients</em></span><em><span>. </span><span>This report updates the Connecticut portion of OLR report </span><span style="color:blue"><a href="http://search.cga.state.ct.us/dtsearch_olr.asp?cmd=getdoc&amp;DocId=12539&amp;Index=I:\zindex\1998&amp;HitCount=1&amp;hits=428+&amp;hc=3&amp;req=682+&amp;Item=0">98-R-0682</a></span><span><a name="P47_622"></a>. <br><br></span></em></span></font></font></span></span></li>
<li><span><span><span><span><font color="#000000" size=2><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/2010/rpt/2010-R-0032.htm">Connecticut and New Hampshire ATV Laws </a>- </font><span><font color="#000000"><font size=2>2010-R-0032<br><em><span>You asked for a summary of laws requiring all-terrain vehicles (ATVs) to be registered with the state, the reasons why people oppose these laws, the reasons why people oppose allowing ATVs on state land, and an analysis of whether charging people to drive ATVs on state land could generate significant revenue for the state</span><span>. </span><span>You also wanted to know about New Hampshire</span><span>'</span><span>s ATV registration laws and fees, and how the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services assesses the environmental impact of ATV use on state land</span><span>. </span></em></font></font></span></span></span></span></span></li></ul></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/9/2010 11:35 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Yeltema, Karen</author>
      <category>FYI;Legal Research</category>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:28:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1084</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Advance Release Opinions - 2/8/10</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1082</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> Recent Decisions;Property Law Opinions</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass0BCD8ABBF60C4498B208F3327892EB0F>
<div><font color="#000000"><font size=2><em>Branford v. Santa Barbara </em>- <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR160.pdf">SC18089</a>  (<span>Condemnation; offer of judgment; appeal; offer of judgment statute [Rev. to 2005] § 52-192a; whether offer of judgment statute applied to condemnation appeals; </span>&quot;These two consolidated appeals, as well as the two companion cases also decided today; see Branford v. Santa Barbara, 294 Conn. 803, A.2d (2010); New England Estates, LLC v. Branford, 294 Conn. 817, A.2d (2010); arise from the exercise of eminent domain by the defendant town of Branford (town), with respect to an approximately seventy-seven acre parcel of land, known as 48-86 Tabor Drive, in the south central area of town&quot;<span>.)</span></font></font> 
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><span></span> </p>
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><span><font color="#000000"><font size=2><em>Branford v. Santa Barbara </em>- <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR165.pdf">SC18090</a> (<span>Eminent domain; &quot;</font></font><font color="#000000" size=2>The owners claim that the court </font><font color="#000000" size=2>improperly concluded, on the basis of its determination </font><font color="#000000" size=2>that the offer of judgment statute conflicts with General </font><font color="#000000" size=2>Statutes § 8-130, which specifically limits the award of </font><font color="#000000" size=2>prejudgment interest in condemnation cases, that § 52- </font><font color="#000000" size=2>192a cannot be utilized in a condemnation appeal. The </font><font color="#000000" size=2>owners contend that the eminent domain statutory </font><font color="#000000" size=2>scheme can be read harmoniously with § 52-192a, and </font><font color="#000000" size=2>that failure to apply § 52-192a to condemnation appeals </font><font color="#000000" size=2>would run contrary to that statute’s well established </font><font color="#000000" size=2>purpose of encouraging pretrial settlements.&quot;)</font></span></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><span><span><font size=2></font></span></span> </p><span><span>
<div><font color="#000000" size=2><em>New England Estates, LLC v. Branford</em> - <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR164.pdf">SC18132</a> (</font><span><font color="#000000" size=2>&quot;</font><font color="#000000" size=2>In this action </font><font color="#000000" size=2>brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (§ 1983 action), </font><font color="#000000" size=2>the town appeals  from the judgment rendered, following </font><font color="#000000" size=2>a jury trial, in favor of the cited in defendants, </font><font color="#000000" size=2>Thomas Santa Barbara, Jr., and Frank Perrotti, Jr., the </font><font color="#000000" size=2>owners of the subject property at the time of the taking </font><font color="#000000" size=2>(owners), and the plaintiff, New England Estates, LLC </font><font color="#000000" size=2>(New England Estates) a developer that had entered </font><font color="#000000" size=2>into an option contract with the owners to purchase </font><font color="#000000" size=2>the property.&quot;)</font><font size=3><font size=2><font size=1><font size=1></font></font></font></span></font></div></span></span></div></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/8/2010 11:49 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Yeltema, Karen</author>
      <category>Recent Decisions;Property Law Opinions</category>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:55:01 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1082</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Advance Release Opinion - 2/8/10</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1081</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> Recent Decisions;Criminal Opinions</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass51F721BA81614B08A141AECD950A76CD><font size=2><font color="#000000"><em>State v. Winot</em> - <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR752.pdf">SC17696</a> (<span>Kidnapping in second degree in violation of § 53a-94 (a); attempt to commit kidnapping in second degree in violation of  § 53a-94 (a); risk of injury to child in violation of § 53-21 (a) (1); whether Appellate Court improperly concluded that § 53a-94 [a] was unconstitutionally vague.)</span></font></font></div>
<ul dir=ltr style="margin-right:0px">
<ul>
<li>
<div class=ExternalClass51F721BA81614B08A141AECD950A76CD><span><font color="#000000" size=2><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR752E.pdf">SC17696 Dissent </a></font></span></div></li></ul></ul></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/8/2010 11:41 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Yeltema, Karen</author>
      <category>Recent Decisions;Criminal Opinions</category>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:33:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1081</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Supreme Court Advance Release Opinion - 2/8/10</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1080</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> Recent Decisions;Medical Malpractice Opinions</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass039C7D0DCF724E1DA7B854BCC8A5AC81><font size=2><font color="#000000"><em>Costantino v. Skolnick</em> - <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR16.pdf">SC18327 </a>(M<span>edical malpractice; offer of judgment statute [Rev. to 2005] § 52-192a; declaratory judgment; &quot;The plaintiff sought the declaration after the parties had entered into a settlement agreement (agreement) that required ProMutual to pay Skolnick’s $1 million policy limit to the plaintiff and under which they stipulated that: (1) the agreement was to be considered a verdict and judgment in favor of the plaintiff for purposes of the offer of judgment statute, General Statutes (Rev. to 2005) § 52-192a; and (2) the plaintiff would have been entitled to <font color="#000000">offer of judgment interest had the case been tried to conclusion.&quot;)</font></span></font></font></div>
<ul class=ExternalClass039C7D0DCF724E1DA7B854BCC8A5AC81 dir=ltr style="margin-right:0px">
<ul>
<li>
<div class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><span><font color="#000000" size=2><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR294/294CR16E.pdf">SC18327 Dissent </a></font></span></div></li></ul></ul></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/8/2010 11:32 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Yeltema, Karen</author>
      <category>Recent Decisions;Medical Malpractice Opinions</category>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 15:32:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1080</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Advance Release Appellate Court Opinions - 2/8/10</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1079</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass57BB8C3B954346C0B609930CB516306D><div>
<div><font color="#000000" size=2>Eight Connecticut Appellate Court opinions are scheduled to be released today. See the Connecticut Judicial Branch website for the </font><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/aro.htm#Appellate"><font size=2>list of case names</font></a><font size=2><font color="#000000"> and links to the full text of the opinions. After today, the opinions will be available from the </font><font color="#000000"><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/archiveAROap.htm">Appellate Court Archive</a></font><font color="#000000">.</font></font></div></div></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/8/2010 8:46 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Yeltema, Karen</author>
      <pubDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2010 13:48:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1079</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Municipal Tax Sales (Extra-Judicial)</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1078</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> FYI;Legal Research;Self-Help</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass045C555198BD4C78878BB58AF01D131B><font color="#000000" size=2>The 2010 edition of </font><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/Notebooks/Pathfinders/MunicipalTaxSales.pdf"><font size=2>Municipal Tax Sales (Extra-Judicial)</font></a><font size=2> <font color="#000000">has been posted to our </font></font><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/selfguides.htm"><font size=2>research guides</font></a><font size=2> <font color="#000000">page.</font></font></div>
<div class=ExternalClass045C555198BD4C78878BB58AF01D131B align=left><font size=2></font> </div>
<div class=ExternalClass045C555198BD4C78878BB58AF01D131B align=left>
<table class=MsoTableGrid style="border-right:medium none;border-top:medium none;background:#f2f2f2;border-left:medium none;border-bottom:medium none;border-collapse:collapse" cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 border=1>
<tbody>
<tr style="height:117.6pt">
<td style="border-right:windowtext 1pt solid;padding-right:5.4pt;border-top:windowtext 1pt solid;padding-left:5.4pt;padding-bottom:0in;border-left:windowtext 1pt solid;width:384.2pt;padding-top:0in;border-bottom:windowtext 1pt solid;height:117.6pt;background-color:transparent" valign=top width=512>
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman"></font> </p>
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><font size=2>&quot;The statutory method for collection of unpaid real estate taxes with which this case is concerned is the public auction, or ‘tax sale,’ pursuant to General Statutes § 12-157, as amended by Public Act No. 95-228 § 3. Unlike a statutory tax foreclosure; General Statutes §§ 12-181, 12-182; or a civil action in debt to collect the tax; General Statutes § 12-161; a public auction of real estate pursuant to General Statutes § 12-157 is entirely extra-judicial.&quot; <u>Pace Motor Lines, Inc. v. Biagiarelli</u>, Superior Court, Judicial District of Bridgeport, Docket No. 318117S, 17 Conn.L.Rptr. 77 (June 24, 1996).</font><font face="Times New Roman"></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><font face="Times New Roman"></font> </p></td></tr></tbody></table></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/5/2010 9:28 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Roy, Christopher</author>
      <category>FYI;Legal Research;Self-Help</category>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:21:08 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1078</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Land Use Law Opinion - January 2010</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1076</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> Land Use Opinions;Recent Decisions</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass83FDA06B2B8F4068827B1F9C736D4FEC>
<div>
<div class=ExternalClass4614515301B24E31B775AA12EFE46453>
<div><span style="font-family:Verdana"><font color="#000000" size=2>Below is the land use law </font><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/appellate.htm"><font color="#000000" size=2>Appellate Court</font></a><font color="#000000" size=2> opinion issued in January 2010:</font></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Verdana">
<ul>
<li>
<div class=MsoNormal style="margin:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="font-family:Verdana"><a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROap/AP119/119ap85.pdf"><font size=2>AC30408</font></a></span><span style="font-family:Verdana"><font color="#000000" size=2> - <em>Lallier v. Zoning Board of Appeals </em>(“This case concerns the authority of a zoning board of appeals to reexamine the merits of an earlier order of a planning and zoning commission that had approved a landowner’s plan to improve his property for agricultural purposes by large scale removal of gravel from the property.  ...[The Zoning Board of Appeals maintains] that the court improperly concluded that (1) the underlying approval of the planning and zoning commission could not be collaterally attacked in a cease and desist order and (2) the agricultural operation of the plaintiff’s land that was approved by the commission authorized the plaintiff to sell his gravel.&quot;)</font></span></div></li></ul></span></div></div></div></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/3/2010 3:42 PM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Dowd, Jeffrey</author>
      <category>Land Use Opinions;Recent Decisions</category>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:52:36 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1076</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Wednesday's Word: Ripeness</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1074</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> FYI</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass539949FFD7BD41308348CD41F43D4085>
<ul>
<li>
<div class=ExternalClassAFBA4975C70A4205952EB9F3E1DF2164><font color="#000000" size=2><strong>Ripeness</strong>: &quot;[T]he rationale behind the ripeness requirement is to prevent the courts, through avoidance of premature adjudication, from entangling themselves in abstract disagreements.... Accordingly, in determining whether a  case is ripe, a trial court must be satisfied that the case before [it] does not present a hypothetical injury or a claim contingent upon some event that has not and indeed may never transpire.&quot; <em>Chapman Lumber, Inc. v. Tager</em>, 288 Conn. 69, 86-87, 952 A.2d 1 (2008)</font></div></li></ul></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/3/2010 9:14 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Booth, George</author>
      <category>FYI</category>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 20:30:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1074</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Advance Release Appellate Court Opinions - 2/03/10</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1077</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClassC11F22DE4EC14CBE9F5654A8705E2765>
<div><font color="#000000" size=2>Six Connecticut Appellate Court opinions, with one dissent and two memorandum decisions, are scheduled to be released today. See the Connecticut Judicial Branch website for the <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/aro.htm#Appellate">list of case names</a> and links to the full text of the opinions. After today, the opinions will be available from the <a href="http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/archiveAROap.htm">Appellate Court Archive</a>.</font></div></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/3/2010 9:05 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Booth, George</author>
      <pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 14:05:28 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1077</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Connecticut General Assembly 2010 Regular Session</title>
      <link>http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1075</link>
      <description><![CDATA[<div><b>Category:</b> FYI;Pending Legislation</div>
<div><b>Body:</b> <div class=ExternalClass945BBB722CD543F4B53D91F3CC774BAB>
<div>
<div><font color="#000000" size=2>The </font><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/"><font size=2>Connecticut General Assembly</font></a><font size=2> <font color="#000000">(CGA) 2010 regular session begins tomorrow. To read about the issues that may be addressed in the upcoming session, see the <a href="http://cga.ct.gov/olr/2010Major Issues/2010-R-0029.pdf">OLR Major Issues</a> <font size=2><font color="#000000">report. Also, </font></font></font></font><font size=2><font color="#000000">the CGA offers </font></font><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/aspx/cgapublicbilltrack/Register.aspx"><font size=2>free bill tracking</font></a><font size=2> <font color="#000000">from its Web site. The service alerts you by email whenever there is activity affecting any of the bills you are tracking. According to the CGA, “you have the ability to add individual bills to a list, add all bills introduced by a specific Legislator or Committee, and add all bills co-sponsored by a specific Legislator.” To register, you need to provide your name and email address. For more information, see the </font></font><a href="http://www.cga.ct.gov/aspx/cgapublicbilltrack/help.htm"><font size=2>bill tracking help page</font></a><font color="#000000" size=2>. </font></div>
<p align=center><img alt="CGA website screenshot" src="/lawlibnews/Newslog/CGA%20Screenshot.JPG"></p></div></div></div>
<div><b>Published:</b> 2/2/2010 10:32 AM</div>
]]></description>
      <author>Roy, Christopher</author>
      <category>FYI;Pending Legislation</category>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Feb 2010 15:22:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">http://ersa.jud.ct.gov/lawlibnews/Lists/Posts/ViewPost.aspx?ID=1075</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>