 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Miller v. Lisman, CV990068679S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF ANSONIA - MILFORD, AT MILFORD, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motion to strike all three counts of plaintiff's complaint alleging negligence and statutory claims against mayor and city was granted because mayor and city were protected by doctrine of qualified immunity.
|
|||||
| Palacios v. Hohl, CV980580157,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Progano v. Progano, FA940135882S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where father had lived in New York since divorce decree was entered, still lived in New York, and mother and children had been living in Ohio for over two years, court declined continuing jurisdiction over child support.
|
|||||
| Pulaski v. Meriden Ventures, CV000439206,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court granted defendants' motion to revise plaintiff's amended complaint; unnecessary allegations were included in the negligence counts.
|
|||||
| SCP Corp. v. BankBoston, X01CV980150598,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Provision for bank's use of best efforts to conclude foreclosure within time frame could not be read to make an illusory inducement to the corporation, as would have been the case if it did not relate to attainment of judgment.
|
|||||
| SCP Corp. v. BankBoston, X01CV980150598,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: To show entitlement to summary judgment for failure to use best efforts to expeditiously effect foreclosure, movant had to present evidence of how long foreclosure took in the very court at the very time in question.
|
|||||
| Scatena v. Rowland, CV000599020S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF HARTFORD, AT HARTFORD, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Southern New Eng. Tel. Co. v. Connecticut Dep't of Pub. Util. Control, CV000502770S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW BRITAIN, AT NEW BRITAIN, January 3, 2001, Decided , January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeal filed outside 45-day period following an administrative ruling was untimely; earlier filing of a motion for reconsideration did not toll statutory period.
|
|||||
| State v. Colon, CR98270986T,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, January 3, 2001, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Motions to suppress denied. Police, who forced their way into defendant's apartment, had not "seized" defendant when they transported him to police station. If they did, probable cause supported the seizure. Custodial statements were voluntary.
|
|||||
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. |
