Section 46a-64c

Citation: Section 46a-64c
Parent Document: Commission on Human Rights & Opportunities Ex Rel. Arnold v. Forvil, 25 A.3d 632 (2011)
Jurisdiction: Connecticut (state)
Effective Date: 2011-08-30
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2318907/commission-on-human-rights-oppo... ↗

Full Text

1,051 chars

265 Conn. 1, 7, 826 A.2d 1088 (2003); the defendants’ single page of briefing on this claim includes no citations to any authority, even for the most general of principles. Furthermore, three of the five paragraphs on that page address either appellate review or the factual background for the claim, leaving only two paragraphs that can be characterized generously as argument. Therein, the defendants suggest that the principle that a state agency cannot satisfy discovery requests for information in control of another state agency is: (1) analogous to a corporation’s design department being unable to satisfy a discovery request against the corporation’s sales department; and (2) an unjust position that “seriously stacks the deck against individual litigants if they choose, as is their right, to fight city hall.” Accordingly, because the defendants “do not cite any authority or develop their claim with analysis, we conclude that the claim is inadequately briefed. See, e.g., Connecticut Light & Power Co. v. Dept. of Public Utility Control,

Other Sections in This Document (123)

Full Text