 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Jones v. Jones, FA 990078925S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In dissolution, custody, and visitation case, court ordered detailed parenting plan, that neither parent take child out of state, and granted child's motion for discontinuance of psychological tests and removal from school.
|
|||||
| Kalinoski v. Cizoce, CV 970156654,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF STAMFORD - NORWALK, AT STAMFORD, November 24, 1999, Decided , November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's claim for a jury was timely filed because the 10-day period did not start to run until plaintiff replied to defendant's amended complaint which raised a new issue of fact.
|
|||||
| Kegeles v. Bergman, Horowitz & Reynolds, P.C., 391439,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN AT NEW HAVEN, November 24, 1999, Decided , November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The motion to strike count four of plaintiffs' complaint was granted; although directed at entrepreneurial aspects of the legal practice, count four's allegation of mere malpractice was not actionable under the unfair trade practices act.
|
|||||
| Marceau v. City of Norwich, File No. CV980116447S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NORWICH, November 24, 1999, Memorandum Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff, bitten by a police dog while giving assistance to police officer, was not barred from suing by governmental immunity because police and city owed a private duty of care since she was not injured by a criminal act.
|
|||||
| Odorczuk v. First Am. Title Ins. Co., CV 9878177S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF LITCHFIELD, AT LITCHFIELD, November 24, 1999, Decided , November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Palmieri v. Lee, 405641,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, November 24, 1999, Decided , November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Despite errors, plaintiff sufficiently pled that defendant aided and abetted defendant's wife in committing actionable conduct, but failed to raise genuine issues of material fact concerning unsupported elements of claims.
|
|||||
| Physicians Sales & Servs. v. Care, 552045,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW LONDON, AT NEW LONDON, November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's motion to dismiss was denied; plaintiff could amend the return date of civil process in order to satisfy the statutory time limit.
|
|||||
| Platt v. Madison Bd. of Tax Review, CV 940360806S, CV 990428295S S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF NEW HAVEN, AT NEW HAVEN, November 24, 1999, Decided , November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Saez v. St. Mary's Hosp., CV 9901523022S,
SUPERIOR COURT OF CONNECTICUT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF WATERBURY, AT WATERBURY, November 24, 1999, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a malpractice action, plaintiff's request for leave to amend complaint was not a new cause of action and was filed well before the statute of limitations had expired.
|
|||||
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. |
