More Important But 100% Less Sexy Than The Whole Bysiewicz Issue
by Ryan McKeen
I guarantee the media won’t pick up on this one. Or at least they didn’t the two previous times that I’ve posted this. But those were made before this site went Hollywood.
I feel very passionately about this topic. Making superior court decisions available on the google makes our courts more transparent and provides access to Connecticut residents who don’t have the dough to fork down big bucks to Wexis. Connecticut should be very proud of the quality of its superior court judges and the opinions they write.
Two winters ago, I attended a seminar on “What Connecticut Judges Want You To Know.”
In law school I learned that a lawyer should always cite cases from the highest court in the state while writing briefs. It was explained that superior or lower court opinions were useful only to the degree that they explained or applied the rulings of higher courts. All of this is true in theory.
A Superior Court judge in Connecticut is bound to follow the ruling of a higher court (either the CT Supreme Court or the Appellate Court). A judge is not compelled to follow an opinion of another superior court judge.
At the seminar a panel of judges stressed the importance of citing the opinions of other superior court judges in briefs to the court. The judges explained that they are always interested in reading how their colleagues dealt with an issue.
The point is that decisions of superior court judges in Connecticut matter. They are vital to the practice of law in Connecticut.
The Judicial Branch website makes the opinions of the Supreme and Appellate Courts available online.
Given the importance of trial court decisions in our State, the ease of publication of cases on the internet and the renewed spirit of openness in Connecticut courts I think that it’s time the judicial branch made superior court decisions available online for free on its website.
January 26th, 2010 at 10:43 pm
“A Superior Court judge in Connecticut is bound to follow the ruling of a higher court (either the CT Supreme Court or the Appellate Court). A judge is not compelled to follow an opinion of another superior court judge.”
Looks like you haven’t been engaged in the “active practice” of law either. For every judge who follows precedent, I can show you one who doesn’t.
[Reply]
Ryan Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 10:50 pm
It would be nice if you could support your assertion with links and examples.
[Reply]
Gideon Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
I would, but the Superior Court decisions aren’t available online for free.
[Reply]
January 27th, 2010 at 12:29 am
Agreed. In addition, the decision are on the website, but only barely. The decisions are unreleased- not formatted for proper citation (and there are cases that have changed from the unreleased to the official versions, if ever so slightly). It would not be hard to have all of Conn Reports & Conn App up, with correct citation. The years 2006 unreleased opinions are hard to search and cannot be cited correctly, why leave them up?
[Reply]
Ryan Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 8:08 am
Matt, where can one find the decisions on the website?
[Reply]
January 27th, 2010 at 1:01 pm
Poor wording, look at the time I posted. I meant the appellate level decisions are at the Judicial Branch website, but only just, since they are arranged by date of publication and not by name or citation, making them almost useless for anyone doing legal research. Also, per Wes Horton the advanced release opinion and the official version can differ, see e.g. Durrant v. Board of Ed, 284 Conn. 91 (2007) and the website version (still up).
[Reply]
Ryan Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 1:44 pm
Have you used google scholar? It’s an excellent way to search appellate level decisions for free.
[Reply]
January 27th, 2010 at 9:07 pm
I share your love for Susan Bysiewicz; and have equal respect for the work Oz Griebel has done for Hartford Metro Alliance. If one of them ends up with their respsctive party nomination, the choice will be easy. If both do, we have to pay more attention.
[Reply]