Burke v. Avitabile

Decision Date04 November 1993
CitationBurke v. Avitabile, 634 A.2d 297, 228 Conn. 908 (Conn. 1993)
CourtConnecticut Supreme Court
PartiesCharles BURKE v. Louis S. AVITABILE.

Meryl Anne Spat, Waterbury, in support of the petition.

Charles Burke, pro se.

The defendant's petition for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 32 Conn.App. 765, 630 A.2d 624 (AC 11723), is denied.

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
24 cases
  • State v. Weiner
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • February 13, 2001
    ...statements of error will not be reviewed by this court. Burke v. Avitabile, 32 Conn. App. 765, 772, 630 A.2d 624, cert. denied, 228 Conn. 908, 634 A.2d 297 (1993). The defendant further appears to claim that the court improperly considered the credibility of the witnesses in determining whe......
  • Misinonile v. Misinonile
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • October 13, 1994
    ...v. Timm, 195 Conn. 202, 210, 487 A.2d 191 (1985)." Burke v. Avitabile, 32 Conn.App. 765, 770-71, 630 A.2d 624, cert. denied, 228 Conn. 908, 634 A.2d 297 (1993). After the trial court found a substantial change of circumstances and was able to consider the merits of the motion to modify, it ......
  • Wright v. Hutt
    • United States
    • Connecticut Court of Appeals
    • September 22, 1998
    ...abandoned and will not be reviewed by this court." Burke v. Avitabile, 32 Conn.App. 765, 772, 630 A.2d 624, cert. denied, 228 Conn. 908, 634 A.2d 297 (1993). Accordingly, we decline to review these The judgment is affirmed. In this opinion the other judges concurred. 1 Article first, § 19, ......
  • Larobina v. McDonald
    • United States
    • Connecticut Supreme Court
    • July 12, 2005
    ...judgment is not to test legal sufficiency of complaint but to test for presence of contested factual issues), cert. denied, 228 Conn. 908, 634 A.2d 297 (1993). We also have recognized, however, that the use of a motion for summary judgment instead of a motion to strike may be unfair to the ......
  • Get Started for Free