 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Cheney v. Cheney, FA9548508S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TOLLAND, AT ROCKVILLE, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An ex-husband's motion for termination or reduction of child support was barred by res judicata; the motion was identical to a previous motion at which the court found the issues in favor of the ex-wife and awarded increased child support.
|
|||||
| Conn. Comm'n on Human Rights & Opportunities v. Wal-Mart Stores, CV010507207S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN AT NEW BRITAIN, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Individual who was unable to perform the essential functions of a job, either with or without reasonable accommodation assistance, was not "qualified person with a disability," and did not meet his prima facie case under the ADA.
|
|||||
| Drennan v. Geist, CV9989114S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF MIDDLESEX, AT MIDDLETOWN, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Patient who brought product liability claim had not alleged that surgical insert was in any way defective or that she had been injured by it. Defendant corporation's motion to strike was granted.
|
|||||
| Hyde v. Gonzalez-Aguillon, CV010806035S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the alleged tortfeasor hit the injured party with a van and then fled and could not be found to be served, the tortfeasor had likely left the jurisdiction, and the commissioner of motor vehicles could accept service on his behalf.
|
|||||
| In re Gregory D., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, JUVENILE MATTERS AT NEW HAVEN, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A mother's parental rights to her son were terminated, because an agency met its burden of showing that the mother neglected the child and the court found that termination of rights was in the best interest of the child.
|
|||||
| In re Nestor R., [NO NUMBER IN ORIGINAL],
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Interview with detective did not violate defendant's constitutional rights where court found defendant not only signed waiver of rights form acknowledging warnings, but engaged in discussion regarding rights with detective.
|
|||||
| Kobyluck v. Planning & Zoning Comm'n of Montville, 121562,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The neighbors, whose property was near the applicant's, established their right to intervene in the applicant's attempt to have conditions removed from its special permit; this would have impacted the neighbors' property value.
|
|||||
| Meyers v. Troncale, CV000439881S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court lacked authority to grant request for extension of time to respond to offer of judgment, as statute expressly stated what would happen if offer were not timely accepted, and granting of relief would arguably have been judicial legislating.
|
|||||
| Raiente v. Raiente, FA000176991S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD-NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, January 2, 2002, Decided , January 2, 2002, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court dissolved marriage based on irretrievable breakdown; granted wife the family home, with husband to eventually receive a share in its equity; and made other orders regarding custody, child support, and property and debt division.
|
|||||
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. |
