DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Blinkoff v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 20 A.3d 1272 (2011)

Citation
Blinkoff v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 20 A.3d 1272 (2011)
Parent Document
Blinkoff v. Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities, 20 A.3d 1272 (2011)
Jurisdiction
Connecticut (state)
Effective Date
2011-06-28
Original Source
https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2551132/blinkoff-v-commission-on-human-... ↗

Other Sections in This Document (55)

Full Text

488 chars 
The plaintiff presently contends that the court should have considered these statements and documents under the doctrines of judicial admissions and judicial estoppel. We take this, essentially, to be a claim that the record should be expanded to include information that was not submitted for the consideration of the referee. In so arguing, the plaintiff misapprehends the scope of review of an administrative appeal, which is confined to the record. See General Statutes § 4-183 (i). 9