WATERBURY–August 24, 2004, Billy Smolinski, 31, was reported missing from his home on Holly St. in Waterbury, Connecticut. A seemingly stable adult with multiple jobs, no criminal record, good relations with his family and always paid his bills on time. When he vanished, leaving behind his beloved dog, Harley, Smolinski’s parents knew something was really wrong.
Showing posts with label missing persons. Show all posts
Showing posts with label missing persons. Show all posts
Thursday, October 29, 2015
Judgment Reversed
#smolinski #gleason #GleasonvSmolinski #CTSupremeCourt
#billysmolinski #SmolinskivGleason #JudgmentReversed
http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/aro.htm#Supreme
In case you haven't heard this yet - Judgment Reversed! Support Team Smolinski
Wednesday, October 28, 2015
Supreme Court Advance Release Opinions: Released after 11:30 a.m.
SC19342 - Gleason v. Jan Kenney Smolinski
SC19342 Dissent - Gleason v. Jan Kenney Smolinski
http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/archiveAROsup15.htm
http://www.ctn.state.ct.us/ctnplayer.asp?odID=11465
Monday, April 27, 2015
Connecticut Supreme Court Oral Argument
Watch the recorded
Connecticut Supreme Court Oral Arguments in this case.
http://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CRN=49764&Type=PartyName
[References made to the record by appellant's attorney see pages 123, 110, 114, 107-117, 116, 115, 34, 40, 8, 9-11, 114.
And those made to the record by appellee's attorney - zippo! not a single one.]
ISSUES PRESENTED
1 Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendants' first
amendment claim of protected speech failed to satisfy the third prong
of the test for review of unpreserved claims set forth in State v. Golding,
213 Conn. 233 (1989)?
2 Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court's determination
that the defendants were liable for defamation per se of the plaintiff?
Insert the Appendix of the Record Insert Smolinski Brief Insert Gleason Brief Trial Court Judgment Insert Judges Articulation Insert Appeal Court Decision Case Links
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=NNHCV065005107S
http://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CRN=45820&Type=PartyName
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_09_751
Insert
http://www.oyez.org/issues/first_amendment/libel/defamation
http://www.oyez.org/issues/first_amendment/libel/privacy
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/418/323/
http://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CRN=49764&Type=PartyName
[References made to the record by appellant's attorney see pages 123, 110, 114, 107-117, 116, 115, 34, 40, 8, 9-11, 114.
And those made to the record by appellee's attorney - zippo! not a single one.]
ISSUES PRESENTED
1 Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the defendants' first
amendment claim of protected speech failed to satisfy the third prong
of the test for review of unpreserved claims set forth in State v. Golding,
213 Conn. 233 (1989)?
2 Did the Appellate Court properly affirm the trial court's determination
that the defendants were liable for defamation per se of the plaintiff?
Insert the Appendix of the Record Insert Smolinski Brief Insert Gleason Brief Trial Court Judgment Insert Judges Articulation Insert Appeal Court Decision Case Links
http://civilinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail/PublicCaseDetail.aspx?DocketNo=NNHCV065005107S
http://appellateinquiry.jud.ct.gov/CaseDetail.aspx?CRN=45820&Type=PartyName
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2010-2019/2010/2010_09_751
Insert
http://www.oyez.org/issues/first_amendment/libel/defamation
http://www.oyez.org/issues/first_amendment/libel/privacy
Gertz v. Robert Welch, Inc.
418 U.S. 323 (1974)
https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/418/323/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)