 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Barkyoumb v. Barkyoumb, FA020730057,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 2, 2004, Decided , January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a wife's assets were the primary source of the down payment on a marital house, and where the parties' children's primary residence was ordered to be with her, she was granted the marital home, and a 50-50 division of the parties' assets.
|
|||||
| Barrett v. Barrett, FA020126298,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, January 2, 2004, Decided , January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The parties' marriage was dissolved. The parties' child support obligations were established and the marital property was divided pursuant to a separation agreement, which the trial court found to be just and equitable.
|
|||||
| Brown & Welsh, P.C. v. Midstate Med. Ctr., CV000598528S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court, in an attorney fees dispute between a law firm and its client hospital suggested to the parties that they resolve their differences; otherwise; the court would enter judgment for the law firm in an amount that the court determined.
|
|||||
| Dir. v. Freedom of Info. Comm'n, CV020519153S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A citizen was entitled to certain records contained in a town's geographic information system database under the Freedom of Information Act because the information was not shown to be protected for public safety purposes and was not a trade secret.
|
|||||
| Lin v. Amtrak, CV990431868,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 2, 2004, Decided , January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Administrator of estate of decedent killed by train on railroad bridge could try to show railroad should have provided pedestrian walkway or place of refuge on bridge, as it was possible railroad had duty to provide for decedent's reasonable safety.
|
|||||
| Lin v. Amtrak, CV990431868,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 2, 2004, Decided , January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The motion in limine of two railroads was denied in a wrongful death action, as issues of material fact existed as to trespassers and whether signs or other warning of dangers on the railroads' property should have been posted by the railroads.
|
|||||
| State v. Gardner, CR98273497,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 2, 2004, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trial court found defendant violated probation and explained its reasons for revocation and imposition of the unexecuted portion of a sentence, its actions, within parameters of the Connecticut General Practice Book, could not be modified.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
