 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Boyne v. Boyne, AC 28996,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Former husband was appropriately ordered to maintain life insurance as security for his support obligations under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿¿ 46b-82(a) and 46b-84(f) as the husband failed to present any evidence that the insurance was unavailable to him or that it was too costly for him to maintain.
|
|||||
| Byrne v. Burke, AC 29237,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 52-577 or ¿ 52-595, the commencement of the action occurred beyond the applicable statutory period, since even if the tort and fraudulent concealment occurred on the same date, the heir had learned of a letter, which was evidence in his favor, through the attorney's testimony during the probate appeal.
|
|||||
| Curley v. Kaiser, AC 29031,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for administratrix in partner's claim that decedent was liable for partnership loss was proper because amendment to former partnership agreement provided that, if decedent was still a partner when he died, he owed no further obligation, and, under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 34-373, partnership was not yet terminated when decedent died.
|
|||||
| Gamble-Perugini v. Perugini, AC 29280,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Award of $100 per week in alimony to a former wife for 10 years under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 46b-82 was appropriate as while the wife was currently a real estate agent and had received rental income properties as part of the property distribution, the wife had modest employment earnings during the marriage.
|
|||||
| Hescock v. Zoning Bd. of Appeals , AC 29316,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly upheld board's conclusion that elimination and reduction of nonconformities presented an independent basis for granting hardship variance. Stonington, Conn., Zoning Regs. ¿¿ 7.7.9.3, 7.7.9.5 and 8.10.3 factors were considered; failure to state that required findings were made was not arbitrary, illegal or abuse of discretion.
|
|||||
| In re Melody L., SC 18085, SC 18086, SC 18087,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights under Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 17a-112 was upheld, where mother was offered services but failed to achieve sufficient personal rehabilitation by, inter alia, securing housing or income, complying with substance abuse testing, or keeping children safe. Children's appeal from denial of motion for visitation was moot.
|
|||||
| Kosinski v. Carr, AC 28981,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was affirmed as seller's claim that buyer's breach of warranty claim was based on unclean hands because buyer had constructive notice of restrictive covenant since attorney discovered covenant during title search prior to execution of contract of sale failed as attorney conducted title search after contract was executed.
|
|||||
| Small v. State, SC 17950,
SUPREME COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Fontaine, AC 28566,
APPELLATE COURT OF CONNECTICUT, January 20, 2009, Officially Released
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Whether a vehicle was wholly self-propelled did not change whether it was a vehicle, and thus a motor vehicle. Per Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿ 14-212(5), any vehicle that was driven on the public highways was a motor vehicle under chapter 248. Thus, the moped was a motor vehicle for purposes of Conn. Gen. Stat. ¿¿ 14-215 and 14-227a.
|
|||||
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. |
