In re Adrien C
In In re Adrien C., 9 Conn. App. 506, 512, 519 A.2d 1241, cert. denied, 203 Conn. 802, 522 A.2d 292 (1987) the statute in question, General Statutes (Rev. to 1983) 46b-129 (e) provided in relevant part: "Ninety days before the expiration of each eighteen-month commitment made in accordance with the provisions of subsection (d) of this section . . . the commissioner . . . shall petition the court either to (1) revoke such commitment . . . (2) terminate parental rights . . . or (3) extend the commitment . . . ."
In that case, the Court concluded that the ninety day prescription established in 46b-129 (e) was directory rather than mandatory. It stated the following:
"The test to be applied in determining whether a statute is mandatory or directory is whether the prescribed mode of action is the essence of the thing to be accomplished, or in other words, whether it relates to a matter of substance or a matter of convenience. . . . If it is a matter of substance, the statutory provision is mandatory. . . . If, however, the legislative provision is designed to secure order, system and dispatch in the proceedings, it is generally held to be directory, especially where the requirement is stated in affirmative terms unaccompanied by negative words." In re Adrien C., supra, 9 Conn. App. 510.