 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| City of West Haven v. M.J. Daly & Sons, X01CV 9601150754S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 4, 2000, Decided , January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment motion was denied regarding indemnification for negligence, because subcontractor failed to show that contractor controlled and specified all aspects of subcontractor's performance.
|
|||||
| Commercial Loan Servs. v. Sklat, CV 980579078S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD - NEW BRITAIN, AT HARTFORD, January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Mortgagor's motion to dismiss foreclosure action was denied because mortgagee had standing to bring foreclosure action even though the mortgage had not been formally assigned to it.
|
|||||
| Elliott v. Stonington Zoning Bd. of Appeals, 549768,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, January 4, 2000, Decided , January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Zoning board's decision approving variance for business owner to construct uncovered deck near edge of existing pier was overturned because board acted without valid reasons and sufficient justification to grant the variance.
|
|||||
| Grigerik v. Sharpe, (AC 15099),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 4, 2000, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiffs were allowed to amend negligence count in their pleading, given fact that amendments were closely related to original complaint, and because lower court's similar finding was entitled to great deference.
|
|||||
| In re Cesar G., (AC 17972),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 4, 2000, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mother's anger, her inability to control it, and her inability to parent her children adequately and safely still remained and prevented the state from revoking its custody of her children.
|
|||||
| In the Interest of Jonathan M., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, JUVENILE MATTERS, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION, January 4, 2000, Decided , January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Father lacked standing to seek habeas corpus relief to gain custody of child. Under Connecticut law, the issue of parental rights was beyond the scope of the writ of habeas corpus.
|
|||||
| JCV Inv. Group, Inc. v. Manjoney, (AC 18757),
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 4, 2000, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff's motion to vacate an arbitration award was properly denied. The submission to the arbitrator was unrestricted, so the court was limited to ascertaining whether the award for defendant conformed to the submission.
|
|||||
| Johnnie J., (NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL),
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, JUVENILE MATTERS, CHILD PROTECTION SESSION, January 4, 2000, Decided , January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where abandonment, failure to rehabilitate, and lack of an ongoing parent-child relationship as to both parents was proven by clear and convincing evidence, the petition to terminate respondents' parental rights was granted.
|
|||||
| Mikita v. Barre, CV 990430564S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 4, 2000, Decided , January 4, 2000, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
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. |
