Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
Opinion Date: February 8, 2022
Areas of Law: Personal Injury
This case law update is brought to you by Freeway Law auto accident and personal injury lawyers in Orange County. The following is not one of our cases, but it is of some significance, and we thought we should share it with our readers for informational purposes. The information above is for informational purposes only and not to be construed as legal advice.
The Supreme Court upheld the decision of the trial court denying Plaintiff’s application for a civil protection order, holding that Plaintiff’s claims on appeal lacked merit.
At issue before the Supreme Court was the standard courts must apply to determine whether an applicant for a civil protection order has established the element of fear. On appeal from the denial of her application for a civil protection order, Plaintiff argued, among other things, that the trial court improperly interpreted Conn. Gen. Stat. 46b-16a as creating a subjective-objective standard for establishing fear rather than a purely objective standard. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the trial court properly interpreted section 46b-16a; (2) none of the trial court’s factual findings was clearly erroneous, and (3) section 46b-16a does not violate the equal protection clause of the Connecticut constitution.